Ignore proportionality at your peril

Ignore proportionality at your peril

The case of Savoye & Savoye v Spicers [2015] EWHC 33 (TCC) concerned the enforcement of an adjudicator's decision. However, it was the decision made by Akerman J on costs that will be of more interest to insolvency professionals engaged in litigation, where the Judge was robust in his application of proportionality, especially in terms of the partner's costs incurred in the matter which the Judge reduced from 111 hours to just 20 hours. Further, although none of the parties had any issue with the other using Leading Counsel, the Judge did, as he did not consider that the i

Subscription Form

Related Articles:
Latest Articles:

Already a subscriber? Login
RELX (UK) Limited, trading as LexisNexis, and our LexisNexis Legal & Professional group companies will contact you to confirm your email address. You can manage your communication preferences via our Preference Centre. You can learn more about how we handle your personal data and your rights by reviewing our  Privacy Policy.

Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.

Read full article

Already a subscriber? Login

About the author:

Stephen qualified as a solicitor in 2005 and joined the Restructuring and Insolvency team at Lexis®PSL in September 2014 from Shoosmiths LLP, where he was a senior associate in the restructuring and insolvency team.

Primarily focused on contentious and advisory corporate and personal insolvency work, Stephen’s experience includes acting for office-holders on a wide range of issues, including appointments, investigations and the recovery and realisation of assets (including antecedent transaction claims), and for creditors in respect of the impact on them of the insolvency of debtors and counterparties.