Blog - Tuesday 14 January 2014

Budgeting Woes

There is a circular doing the rounds from Outer Temple Chambers, regarding an anonymous case where a DJ in London struck out the Claimant’s budget as it contained the incorrect statement of truth. Apparently C included the statement of truth as per Precedent H in paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 3E (on page 23 of the White Book’s October 2013 2nd Supplement), rather than Practice Direction 3E para 1, and Practice Direction 22 para 2.2A):

“The costs stated to have been incurred do not exceed the costs which my client is liable to pay in respect of such work. The future costs stated in this budget are a proper estimate of the reasonable and proportionate costs which my client will incur in this litigation.”

This story is unfortunately not an isolated incident. There are many weird and wonderful stories creeping out of Court rooms all over England and Wales at the moment. From judges refusing to deal with budgets, holding a mini assessment in advance, or simply misguiding themselves on a par with Columbus (who, lets remember, was trying to find a new route to India).

Oh and for those avid 4 readers (the New Year has brought an invasion of new readers), Judgment was reserved in relation to my Appeal on Friday, expected to be handed down within the next few weeks.