Home / Dispute Resolution / Costs and funding / Principles of costs recovery

Legal News

Master was wrong to disallow costs where there was doubt as to a retainer (Robinson v EMW Law)

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
Published on: 13 July 2018
Published by a LexisNexis Dispute Resolution expert

Table of contents

  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

Dispute resolution analysis: This article looks at the correct approach to issues concerning the existence of a retainer in a detailed assessment of costs between parties and whether a consultant to a firm of solicitors can charge for time spent working on a case where he is also a party. Written by Jon Lord, associate at Weightmans LLP.

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom

Related documents:

4 News
View More
2 Practice notes
6 Q&As
View More
Powered by Lexis+®

Related documents:

4 News
View More
2 Practice notes
6 Q&As
View More

Popular documents

Pre-action—costs recovery

Pre-action—costs recoveryThis Practice Note considers the recovery of costs incurred pre-action. It sets out provisions in the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981), CPR 44, pre-action protocols and court guides. It notes the provisions for civil cases that come within the fixed costs regime on or after

Appeals—costs recovery

Appeals—costs recoveryThis Practice Note provides information on the appeal court’s power to order costs, whether these costs can be summarily assessed and/or ordered on an indemnity basis. whether it is possible to recover the costs incurred during an appeal. It considers the Supreme Court’s power

Fixed costs—fast track trial costs (position prior to 1 October 2023)

Fixed costs—fast track trial costs (position prior to 1 October 2023)Note, the extension of the fixed costs regime came into force on 1 October 2023. For all civil cases, other than personal injury and disease, the extended fixed costs regime applies (unless the case is specifically excluded) where

Costs budgeting—completing Precedent T (particulars for varying a costs budget)

Costs budgeting—completing Precedent T (particulars for varying a costs budget)This Practice Note provides assistance in completing Precedent T. This is the court form that the parties are required to use when seeking party agreement, and/or court approval for a change to their agreed/approved