Legal Practice Notes

ARCHIVED –this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 10 March 2020; it is no longer maintained. NOTE— The Supreme Court has granted permission to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s judgment on costs. See the timeline, commentary and related cases for further details. Case facts Outline Appeal by the Competition and Markets Authority against the CAT’s ruling which quashed the CMA’s infringement decision of 12 February 2016 that fined Pfizer Inc and Flynn Pharma ( Holdings) Limited for charging unfair and excessive prices for phenytoin sodium capsules, contrary to Article 102 TFEU and Chapter II of the Competition Act 1998. Latest developments On 10 March 2020, the Court of Appeal delivered its judgment, rejecting the CMA’s attempt to reinstate the fines. However, it concluded that the CAT made legal errors in its assessment of the CMA’s excessive pricing decision against Pfizer Inc and Flynn...

CASE HUB ARCHIVED – this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 7 April 2014; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline, commentary and related cases. Case facts Outline An appeal by the OFT against the CAT’s decision to permit Somerfield and Gallaher to file a late appeal challenging the OFT’s tobacco cartel decision. The Court of Appeal delivered its ruling on 07/04/2014, upholding the OFT’s appeal... Parties Office of Fair Trading ( OFT) Somerfield Stores Limited and its parent company, The Co-operative Group Food Limited ( Somerfield was acquired by the Co-op during the OFT’s cartel investigation). Gallaher Group Limited and its subsidiary Gallaher Limited. Background The OFT issued its infringement decision in the Tobacco cartel on 15 April 2010. Somerfield and Gallaher had previously settled with the OFT, accepting liability in exchange for a reduced penalty (the...

ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This archived Practice Note is not maintained or kept under review. It outlines a series of illustrative decisions issued before May 2025 concerning the court’s discretion to allow amendments to parties and statements of case after a limitation period has expired across the reported case law. It cites section 35 of the Limitation Act 1980 ( LA 1980) and pertinent provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules ( CPR), in particular, but not limited to, CPR 17.4 and CPR 19.6, and concentrates on cases likely to interest a dispute resolution practitioner. For concise summaries of illustrative decisions relating to LA 1980 dated after May 2025, where relevant and applicable, see also Practice Note: Limitation—illustrative decisions. For guidance on when a court may permit amendments to a party’s statement of case once the...

This Practice Note outlines the court’s case management powers under the Family Procedure Rules 2010 ( FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 4, such as altering the time for compliance by the parties (by extending or accelerating deadlines), adjourning hearings, requiring attendance at court, and ordering a separate hearing of any issue. It explains how the court must advance the overriding objective through active case management ( FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 1.4) and what it takes into account when using these powers. This covers orders made on the court’s own initiative, sanctions for non-compliance and relief from sanctions, provision for vulnerable parties, civil restraint orders, and the power to rectify any procedural error. In summary, the key case management powers of the court are: The overriding objective FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, Pt 1 sets out the overriding objective. Its aim is to enable the court to deal with...

ARCHIVED This Practice Note relies on provisions revoked on 1 April 2013 and is provided for historical reference. Introduction The court enjoys a very broad discretion to decide if costs are payable, the figure to be paid, and the point at which payment is due. The court must also determine whether to: conduct a summary assessment of the costs; or order a detailed assessment of the costs by a costs officer......

Presumption of continued parental involvement The presumption of continued parental involvement obliges the court, when deciding the following, to start from the position that a child’s welfare is promoted by the participation of each parent in the child’s life, unless shown that such involvement would not in fact serve the child’s welfare: contested applications for orders under Ch A 1989, s 8 contested applications to vary or discharge those orders granting or removing parental responsibility in favour of a parent other than the mother See Practice Note: Welfare of the child—presumption of continued parental involvement. Transitional provisions state that the presumption does not apply to family proceedings begun but not concluded before 22 October 2014. Note that the Ministry of Justice ( Mo J) has announced its intention to repeal the presumption of parental involvement from sections 1(2A), (2B) and (6) of the...

This Practice Note examines, in particular, the following rules and practice in relation to County Court judgments: CPR 40.9A County Court judgments and orders—variation of payment CPR 40.13A County Court set-off of cross-judgments CPR 40.14A County Court certificate of judgment When can you vary a payment ordered under a County Court judgment? CPR 40.9A provides that where a judgment creditor has obtained a County Court order or judgment for the payment of money, either the judgment creditor or the judgment debtor may apply to the court to seek a variation to the date or the rate of payment. Under section 71 of the County Courts Act 1984 ( CCA 1984), the County Court has power to direct that the money be paid in a single lump sum or by instalments. The Court of Appeal’s decision in Loson v Stack offered guidance on the test to be applied when the court is...

This Practice Note sets out practical, hands-on guidance on the steps in a typical countervailing investigation. It spans every stage, from the initial application through to the final determination in the investigation. Introduction There are multiple phases in a countervailing inquiry. This Practice Note explains these phases as framed by the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. Variations at national level may arise depending on the approach of the competent investigating authority. A flow chart mapping these phases appears below, and, immediately beneath that, practice-focused guidance on each phase is provided. Both items are set out directly below for ease of use too. Submission of written complaint Ordinarily, an investigating authority will commence a countervailing investigation only where a written complaint (application) is lodged by the affected domestic industry. For our guidance on the criteria for such an application, and on the obligation on the...

This Practice Note offers practical direction on applying for a countervailing investigation with the UK’s Trade Remedies Authority ( TRA). It sets out who may apply, what to do before applying, how to obtain and file the form, the information required, how to prepare a non-confidential version, guidance for completing the form, and how the application will be assessed. Who can apply? Only the UK industry may submit an application, whether directly or through a representative. For these purposes, the UK industry means either: all UK manufacturers of the like product; or those UK manufacturers whose combined output of the like product amounts to a major proportion of total UK production of those products The application must also show the extent of UK industry support for, or opposition to, the request, including: the total volume and value of UK production of the like...

This Practice Note sets out the essentials of counter-terrorist financing ( CTF), covering the offences and duties under the Terrorism Act 2000 ( TA 2000) and related legislation. It outlines the key offences and obligations. It summarises the meaning of terrorist financing, its links with the anti-money laundering ( AML) framework, and why it matters for law firms... What is terrorist financing? Terrorist activity requires money to organise and execute attacks. TA 2000 makes it an offence to engage in terrorism and to finance it. Broadly, terrorist financing means supplying or gathering funds—whether derived from lawful or unlawful sources—with the intention, or with knowledge, that they are to be used to commit any terrorist act, irrespective of whether the money is ultimately applied for that end... Counter-terrorist financing and anti-money laundering CTF and AML are distinct, though they pursue comparable objectives. In the UK, the two regimes...

This Practice Note reviews the costs associated with arbitrations brought under the Vienna International Arbitral Centre ( VIAC) Arbitration Rules 2021 (the Vienna Rules). The 2021 Vienna Rules came into force on 1 July 2021 and govern any proceedings begun on or after that date. They set out the typical categories of costs that parties are likely to incur during arbitrations conducted under the Vienna Rules. If your case proceeds under the Vienna Rules 2018, in effect from 1 January 2018, you should refer to that earlier text. The registration fee The claimant (or counter-claimant) must pay a non-refundable registration fee when filing the Statement of Claim ( Vienna Rules, art 10(1)). The fee depends on the amount in dispute ( Vienna Rules, Annex 3): €500 where the amount in dispute is up to €25,000 €1,000 where the amount in dispute is between...

This Practice Note addresses the recovery of costs in proceedings within the Business & Property Courts where the Disclosure Scheme, applicable to most matters under CPR PD 57AD, operates. The Scheme can materially influence costs recoverability, notably where costs management applies. Its impact is heightened because the provisions of CPR PD 57AD override any inconsistent rules or practice directions, including the costs management and budgeting regime. This Practice Note also outlines a timetable for supplying costs information in advance of the case management conference ( CMC). For general guidance on the Scheme, see: Disclosure Scheme ( Business & Property Courts)—overview. Requirement to provide costs estimates at an early stage Under CPR PD 57AD, parties must provide an early estimate of the anticipated costs of undertaking Extended Disclosure: Disclosure Review Document ( DRD)—parties must set out the projected cost of collection,...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is retained solely for historical reference and should not be treated as current guidance herein. CPR provisions The rules dealing with general costs continue to sit within CPR 44. The Part has been reorganised and reordered to make it simpler and more intuitive to navigate through. The principal changes affecting Part 44 are as follows: Re-numbering—the CPR Committee has taken the opportunity to re-number the rules so they follow a single continuous sequence, removing any need for suffix letters to differentiate provisions such as CPR 44.3A New provisions—there are several wholly new rules, together with material moved in from other Parts: the court’s discretion as to costs is set out at CPR 44.2; Rules 44.3A and 44.3B are now obsolete, and CPR 44.3C has been transferred to CPR 46.7 the basis of assessment at CPR 44.3 now contains additional provisions on...

This Practice Note sets out clear and practical guidance on the purpose of a costs order, what items it may encompass, the obligation to notify the client about any costs order that may arise, and the importance of making proper submissions on costs. It also outlines the various forms of costs orders, common terms relating to costs, and how the Boxall principles operate in the context of general civil litigation. Purpose of costs orders The overarching aim of a costs order is to allow a party to recover a reasonable and proportionate sum of costs. It is not intended to compensate, nor to place the receiving party in the position they would have occupied had it not been necessary to litigate to vindicate their rights. These core propositions were discussed at length by the Supreme Court in the leading authority case of Process &...

This Practice Note explores the position on costs following an application for an interim injunction, the courts’ usual approach, and when the court may depart from that stance. It also addresses how the court deals with recovery of costs on freezing injunction applications and the making of costs orders on anti-suit injunctions. Costs orders following applications for interim injunctions An applicant who secures an interim injunction might reasonably expect the court to direct the respondent to pay the application costs. However, in Desquenne et Giral v Richardson (1999), the Court of Appeal determined that where relief is granted (or agreed by consent) on the balance of convenience, costs will ordinarily be reserved until trial of the substantive issues. The reason is that, at the interim stage, there is no clear successful or unsuccessful party, so the general rule that the losing party pays the winner’s costs ( CPR...

This Practice Note outlines the position on costs where proceedings are brought to an end against a defendant. It also highlights practical considerations for the parties, bearing in mind their likely competing interests in relation to costs. It is intended as a starting point and should be read alongside Practice Notes: Costs of discontinuing a claim—the general rule and Costs of discontinuing a claim—displacing the presumption. Discontinuance—what does it mean? Discontinuance refers to a claimant ending all or part of their claim against one or more defendants. This arises only where court proceedings have been issued. If no proceedings have been issued, there is no formal claim to discontinue. For example, where a claimant sends a letter before action but then elects not to take the matter further, that will not amount to discontinuance. The governing rules on...

This Practice Note surveys the core principles of the costs management regime. The principal documents within the regime are cost budgets and costs management orders ( CMO). It addresses: the purpose of costs management and how it operates through costs budgeting and CMOs the key sources governing the regime ( CPR 3 and CPR PD 3D) exceptions to the regime and the court’s discretion to apply (order) or disapply costs management what costs budgets are and why they are used electronic filing of bundles for costs management conferences Costs management—introduction The aim of costs management is for the court to control the parties’ future expenditure alongside the procedural steps to be taken (known as case management). In combination, these measures advance the overriding objective ( CPR 3.12(2)). CPR 3.12– CPR 3.18 and CPR PD 3D contain the principal rules and guidance for the costs management regime. The court’s costs...

Costs budgeting light In May 2023, the Civil Justice Council ( CJC) released a report on costs, identifying areas where the appropriate costs management regime might diverge from the norm and from one another across different contexts. Acting on that recommendation, a costs sub‑committee produced two new draft pilots for costs budgeting, adopting a streamlined ‘costs budgeting light’ approach. One pilot will concern Business and Property Court ( B& PC) cases, while the other will apply to ‘certain other cases’ outside the B& PC valued at under £1m. A new Precedent costs form, modelled on the existing Precedent H, has been drafted and was approved in principle at the Civil Procedure Rule Committee ( CPRC) meeting on 4 October 2024. For drafting purposes, this new Precedent is described as ‘ Precedent Z’. A proposed new Precedent RZ (budget discussion report) has also been created for use...

This Practice Note sets out guidance on costs principles and the relevant case law that apply in public law children matters, such as care proceedings and adoption. It explains how the courts approach costs orders against parties, including local authorities, and addresses fact-finding hearings and situations involving an intervener. It also outlines the position on costs and the Legal Aid Agency ( LAA) statutory charge where a claim for damages is pursued under the Human Rights Act 1998 ( HRA 1998). General principles In children proceedings, the usual rule that costs follow the event does not operate; this is pursuant to the Family Procedure Rules 2010 ( FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 28.2(1), which disapplies CPR 44.2(2)......

Key documents This Practice Note should be read alongside the following legislation and Practice Direction: Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 ( POA 1985) Costs in Criminal Cases ( General) Regulations 1986 (1986 Regulations), SI 1986/1335 Practice Direction ( Costs in Criminal Proceedings) 2015 [2015] EWCA Crim 1568 (as amended), and Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 ( Crim PR 2025), SI 2025/909, Pt 45 Who can obtain costs in a private prosecution? Private prosecutor’s costs from defendants In a private prosecution, the court may direct that the defendant pays the prosecution’s costs in the same circumstances as a public prosecution, specifically where: the magistrates’ court has convicted the defendant of an offence the Crown Court has dismissed an appeal against conviction the Crown Court has convicted the defendant of an offence an application to appeal against conviction has been refused by the Court of...