Costs proportionality—illustrative decisions
Costs proportionality—illustrative decisions

The following Dispute Resolution guidance note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Costs proportionality—illustrative decisions
  • Cases from 2020
  • Cases from 2019
  • Cases from 2018
  • Cases from 2017
  • Cases from 2016
  • Cases from 2015
  • Cases from 2014
  • Cases from 2012/2013

This Tracker lists a number of decisions in which the court has considered issues of proportionality since 2012.

For the up to date position on the court’s approach to proportionality, see Practice Note: Costs and proportionality.

Cases from 2020

Case, citation and date of judgment Issues Comment News Analysis/guidance
King Security Systems v King [2019] EWHC 3620 (Ch) Costs relationship to amount of money involved. Master Kaye, when considering costs budgeting, noted that the court has a very broad discretion when considering costs budgeting. In this case, she considered that the overall costs for both parties (incurred and budgeted) were disproportionate to the issues in dispute. However, she acknowledged, that for both sides, the issues were considered to be significantly important such as to justify the expenditure on legal fees. While the court considers that costs are not proportional, nothing the court does during costs management will limit the amount of costs that parties can incur in proceedings. The question will ultimately be whether such costs will be recoverable. Master restricts scope of disclosure but declines to record comments