Legal News

Defendant bound by costs order agreed between counsel (Ashford Borough Council v Wilson)

Published on: 13 May 2022
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Defendant bound by costs order agreed between counsel (Ashford Borough Council v Wilson)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

Dispute Resolution analysis: Darryl Allen QC, sitting as a Deputy Judge, held that a defendant who had been unsuccessful at trial was bound by a subsequent costs order agreed by his counsel. The order provided for payment of the claimant’s costs including indemnity costs and additional interest from expiry of a Part 36 offer. The defendant argued that his counsel had no longer been instructed by him at the time the order was agreed. After canvassing the authorities, Mr Allen QC found that there was no evidence that the defendant had disinstructed his barrister, or issued instructions that the costs order was not be agreed to. The defendant was thus bound by the order. The judge held that he would have made the same orders as were agreed in any event. Written by David Juckes, barrister at Hailsham Chambers. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents