‘The Appellant had succeeded against the Respondent in a clinical negligence claim but when the matter came before District Judge Lumb for a detailed assessment of her costs, he was asked to determine as a preliminary issues whether his discretion on costs was fettered by the cots budgeting regime. The case had settled in advance of the trial with the inevitable consequence that the Appellant’s costs were significantly less than those which had been budgeted for and approved pursuant to a previous costs management order made under CPR 3.15(2).’
Zenith PI Blog, 1st March 2017
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
