The Court of Appeal has twice in one week cut multi-million-pound costs claims down to size
Even in the biggest cases, the courts expect costs to be reasonable and proportionate. Two Court of Appeal decisions this week show that clearly.
In the long-running Yukos award enforcement case, Russia was asked to provide security for its opponents' costs. The court called one KC's £2m brief fee for a four-day hearing "astonishing". It said that counsel's seniority and "market forces" have little to do with what a costs judge would allow. It also queried possible duplication in the solicitors' £675,000 of profit costs. Instead of the £2.5m sought, the court ordered £975,000.
In a separate case, Parsons v Convatec, the Court of Appeal reduced one side's approved costs budget to £4m.
The lesson for anyone paying legal fees is simple: a large number on a schedule or a bill is a starting point, not a final answer. Every item has to be justified.
Why it matters to you
These rulings back the principle that we at CMLF apply to every bill: you only pay what is reasonable, however eminent the lawyer.