Legal Updates
The latest costs case law and practice developments affecting legal costs in England and Wales.
Latest costs case notes
Case analysis from Mackenzie Costs, the regulated costs practice behind this platform.
Magomedov v Rabinovich [2026] EWHC 962 (SCCO): No Jurisdiction in the SCCO to Order Security for Costs of the Detailed Assessment Hearing
In the first reported decision of its kind, the Senior Courts Costs Office held that it has no jurisdiction under CPR 25 to order security for the costs of an inter partes detailed assessment hearing, and gave practical guidance on what such an assessment ought reasonably to cost.
Read the full noteSpicer v Greene King: 25% CFA Cap Is Not a Tariff [2026] EWCC 18
Spicer v Greene King confirms that the 25% CFA success fee cap is a maximum, not a tariff. District Judge Lumb reduced the success fee sought from a child's damages from £2,500 to £330 plus VAT and disallowed the ATE premium.
Read the full noteCPRC Resolves to Delete CPR 3.16(2) and Refers Attersley to Lacuna Sub-Committee
The Civil Procedure Rule Committee has resolved to delete CPR 3.16(2), which required costs management conferences to be conducted by telephone or in writing, as unduly restrictive and outdated.
Read the full noteBrandalised v Banksy: Indemnity Costs for Litigation Deployed as Leverage [2026] EWHC 795 (KB)
Nicklin J orders indemnity costs against Brandalised after finding defamation proceedings against Banksy were pursued as leverage exploiting his anonymity, but refuses non-party costs order against sole director.
Read the full noteSafra v WilmerHale: US $35 Million Retainer Was Not a Contentious Business Agreement [2026] EWHC 703 (SCCO)
Costs Judge Leonard finds WilmerHale engagement letter was not a CBA due to open-ended rate review provisions, and invoices were not statutory bills. Full s.70 assessment ordered of US $35.3 million.
Read the full noteHammond v Herrington Carmichael: Interim Statute Bills and Special Circumstances (2026)
Costs Judge Whalan considers whether 29 invoices totalling £174k from family proceedings were Interim Statute Bills or Chamberlain bills, and whether special circumstances exist for a section 70 assessment.
Read the full noteAlphabet v AXA: Suing for Pre-Action Costs Not an Abuse of Process [2026] EWHC 674 (SCCO)
Costs Judge Brown confirms proceedings issued solely to recover pre-action costs are not abusive, and that the test for instructing solicitors is reasonableness not necessity. FRC Table 12 applied.
Read the full noteJustice Investments v Visalia Energia: Security for Costs and the Stifling Test [2026] EWHC 676 (KB)
Mrs Justice Eady orders £250,000 security for costs where claimant company fails to provide full, frank and unequivocal evidence on beneficial ownership and financial position, reducing the defendants request of £771,939 by approximately two-thirds.
Read the full noteSmith v Wigan Borough Council: Settlement Sum Not Determinative of Track Allocation [2026] EWHC 660 (SCCO)
Costs Judge Nagalingam upholds provisional assessment, ruling that CPR 46.13 is discretionary and the settlement sum is not definitive of claim value for retrospective track allocation.
Read the full note