Service in England and Wales

Recoverability of probate costs (Hutson (Deceased) v Tata Steel UK Ltd)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: In Hutson (Deceased) v Tata Steel UK Ltd (SCCO), Costs Judge Rowley considered whether the costs of obtaining a grant of probate (or letters of administration) could be recovered in litigation. Unlike Mosson v Spousal (London) Ltd, where probate costs were treated as irrecoverable damages (under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934), here the court was asked to consider whether costs of probate were recoverable as costs. Rowley J held that if probate was obtained solely for the purpose of litigation, then the reasonable costs of doing so were recoverable inter partes. Where probate was required for estate administration, however, only the nominal cost of obtaining a copy could be claimed. The decision also sets out a practical test for recoverability, lowering the evidential threshold: a simple confirmation by the personal representative would appear to suffice. This marks a notable shift in stance since Mosson, with significant implications for practitioners handling claims brought by estates. Written by Jim Hester, barrister at Parklane Plowden Chambers.

190th Practice Direction update—online civil claims—in force 16 September 2025

The 190th Practice Direction update comes into force at 11am on 16 September 2025. This update introduces changes to amend CPR PD 51R (the Online Civil Money Claims Pilot) and CPR PD 51ZB (the Damages Claims Pilot). The changes to CPR PD 51R expand the case progression and general applications features to all County Courts. The update also makes minor tidying up amendments to CPR PD 51R and CPR PD 51ZB.

Court’s power to grant anonymity orders in personal injury litigation to ensure the proper administration of justice (PMC v Cwm Taf Mogannwg UHB)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: The Court of Appeal has clarified the law on granting anonymity orders as part of the court’s inherent jurisdiction, overturning the first instance decision which had cast doubt on the guidance provided by the Court of Appeal in X v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust, in which it established the general rule for granting anonymity orders made post-settlement in advance of approval hearings for protected parties in personal injury cases. At first instance, Mr Justice Nicklin held that the court had very limited powers to make an anonymity order in personal injury litigation and that it was not appropriate to make such an order in the case of PMC, where the claimant’s case had been much publicised in the press. Written by Robert Weir KC, barrister at Devereux Chambers.

Road traffic accident update—Whiplash Injury Regulations and road traffic accident claims mediation

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: This road traffic accident update comments on the guidance on minor psychological injuries published by the Ministry of Justice and the amendments to Practice Direction 51R to subject non-personal injury road traffic accident claims to mediation. The update is written by Jon Wong, barrister in the Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence teams at Guildhall Chambers, with contributions from Alice Reeves.