Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Practitioners are reminded that claims can be reallocated to multitrack to allow costs recovery. We consider the various issues that arose in yesterday's Court of Appeal decision (26 February) in Conlon v Royal Sun Alliance  EWCA Civ 92.
In the small claims court no inter partes costs orders will be made unless a party has acted unreasonably. The claimant was appealing a judgment which found against her and she made an application for reallocation to a different track with such reallocation to be backdated so as to enable the court to order costs recovery if successful on her appeal.
The Court of Appeal noted that under CPR 46.13 the court has the power to reallocate as well as to backdate the reallocation so allowing recovery of costs from the backdated date. However, it held that parties are entitled to rely on the costs provisions in small claims proceedings and this would play a part in the strategy adopted during the proceedings. It would therefore require the court to be satisfied that there were good reasons for ordering a backdated reallocation and timing of the application would be a key consideration.
Following the Court of Appeal decision inAkhtar ( EWCA Civ 943 ) the inability to recover costs in small claims applies throughout the entire appeal process including second appeals.
In this case leaving the application until four months after filing the notice of appeal was considered to be far too late. No guidance was provided in the short judgment as to what issues the court may consider in determining whether the application was too late. If dealing with a small claims matter which is likely to involve substantial costs, such costs would generally either be due to:
The defendant had, for commercial reasons, determined it would not contest the appeal; it agreed to the judgment in its favour being set aside and judgment being entered for the claimant. The Court of Appeal found nothing to criticise in the approach taken by the defendant.
Whether the reallocation is being sought against a party with sufficient financial means, in this case the defendant was a substantial business, appears to carry no weight. The general principle applies that any party should be entitled to run its case in the small claims courts on the basis that there will be no costs recovery.
Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.
Read full article
Already a subscriber? Login
Janna is a dispute resolution lawyer with a Masters in Construction Law and Dispute Resolution. During her time in private practice at both Herbert Smith and Denton Wilde Sapte (now Dentons) she worked on complex international disputes, both litigation and LMAA arbitrations, dealing with technical cross border issues.
Janna deals primarily with cross border issues and is active in the work being undertaken in relation to the implications of Brexit for Dispute Resolutions lawyers. She also heads up a LexisNexis costs team bringing together expertise from across the company to deal with the costs issues facing the profession and was a contributing author for the Cook on Costs supplement dealing with the Jackson reforms. Janna is a frequent contributor to the legal and professional press, including the New Law Journal and Counsel magazine.
0330 161 1234