‘The paying parties appeal against a decision of the High Court reversing a decision of the costs judge, whereby he declined to set aside his earlier order granting an extension of time for serving the points of dispute. The principal issues in this appeal are whether the costs judge was dealing with relief from sanctions and whether he exercised his case management discretion in a proper manner.’
Held: The judge ought not to have interfered with the costs judge’s exercise of discretion. The appeal was allowed. An application for an extension of the time allowed to take any particular step in litigation is not an application for relief from sanctions, provided that the applicant files his application notice before expiry of the permitted time period. This is the case even if the court deals with that application after the expiry of the relevant period.
Jackson, Lewison, Christopher Clarke LJJ
[2014] EWCA Civ 661, [2014] 4 Cost LR 660
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 1998 47.9
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Robert v Momentum Services Ltd CA 11-Feb-2003
The claimant appealed against an order refusing an extension of time for service of her particulars of claim. She had made the application before the period expired.
Held: The rules made a clear distinction between applications made before . .
Cited – Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 27-Nov-2013
(Practice Note) The claimant brought defamation proceedings against the defendant newspaper. His solicitors had failed to file his costs budget as required, and the claimant now appealed against an order under the new Rule 3.9, restricting very . .
Cited by:
Cited – Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and Others QBD 29-Jun-2015
Orders allowing extension of time for service of the Particulars of Claim. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice, Costs
Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525626
