Decision provides guidance on the revision of costs budgets in civil litigation

Against the background of the significant changes to case and costs management in civil litigation that have been imposed by the Jackson Reforms post-1 April 2013 in certain cases, the case of Murray & another v Neil Dowlman Architecture Limited provides some early guidance on the revision of costs budgets.

Prior to implementation of the Jackson Reforms to the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), the courts ran a costs pilot scheme in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC). Whilst the scheme’s governing rules have not been transposed exactly into the amended CPR, nevertheless they contain very similar costs and case management provisions to those now in force. The provisions in question in this case are analogous to new CPR 3.12 — 18 and PD 3E, which state that the court may “approve, vary or disapprove [any proposed] revisions [to costs budgets], having regard to any significant developments which have occurred since the date when the previous budget was approved or agreed”

If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Walker Morris briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.

 

Briefings from Walker Morris

View more briefings from Walker Morris

Analysis from The Lawyer

View more analysis from The Lawyer

Overview

Kings Court
12 King Street
Leeds
LS1 2HL
UK
http://www.walkermorris.co.uk

Turnover (£m): 42.00
No. of Lawyers: 181