The anticipated Court of Appeal judgment of Hadley v Przybylo [2024] EWCA Civ 250 has been handed down this morning. The panel, consisting of Lord Justice Coulson and Lord Justice Dingemans (‘Lord Justices’), considered whether the cost of a fee earner’s attendance at rehabilitation case management meetings was irrecoverable in principle as legal costs.
Background
The proceedings concerned a road-traffic accident that caused the Claimant to suffer catastrophic injuries including numerous broken bones, damage to his spleen, bladder, kidney and lungs, a traumatic brain injury, permanent brain damage and sub-arachnoid haemorrhaging. Following the accident, the Claimant underwent rehabilitation at numerous facilities and once a Court of Protection order was in place, the Claimant was discharged into the community with a team of carers that provided 24-hour care.
First Instance Judgment
The cost budget put forward on behalf of the Claimant sought £1.18 million in costs.
Master McCloud ordered that the parties engage in ADR in respect of the future costs. Following ADR, only the “Issues and Statements of Case” phase remained in issue, in which £68,400 was claimed for estimated costs.
The Defendant challenged the costs claimed in this phase on the basis that a solicitor’s attendance at case management meetings with medical and other professionals during management of the Claimant’s rehabilitation needs, and at meetings with professional deputies (said to be part of creating a Schedule of Loss) were not in principle recoverable as costs of the litigation.
Master McCloud considered whether such attendances were progressive. She determined that they were not and that the costs were not capable of being recovered inter-partes.
Master McCloud gave permission for a ‘leapfrog’ appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Court of Appeal Judgment
The Claimant appealed Master McCloud’s finding and the Court of Appeal were tasked with determining whether a solicitor’s time attending rehabilitation case management meetings and the like were recoverable in principle as inter-partes costs.
The Court of Appeal considered that there were two issues:
- Is attendance at rehabilitation case management meetings recoverable in principle?
- If it is, are there any limits that this court should place on its recoverability at this stage, or should those be addressed on assessment?
The Lord Justices held that this element of the costs was recoverable in principle and found that:
“the Serious Injury Guide and the Rehabilitation Code both envisage the possible involvement of a solicitor in ongoing rehabilitation meetings. Whilst the extent of them, and the amount of necessary attendance, is a matter for the assessment of the cost budget or detailed assessment, both of those guides would clearly indicate that, as a matter of principle, this was a recoverable category of costs.”
The Lord Justices stated that:
“It would be wrong to decide that the costs of the solicitors’ attendance at rehabilitation case management meetings are always irrecoverable. Equally, it would be wrong for the claimant’s solicitor to assume that routine attendance at such meetings will always be recoverable. It will always depend on the facts.”
Whilst finding that the costs of attending rehabilitation case management meetings are recoverable in principle, these costs are of course subject to reasonableness and proportionality. The Lord Justices warned that there was no blanket or default entitlement to attend rehabilitation case management meetings routinely.
Ellena Hunter is an Associate in the Costs and Litigation Funding Department at Clarion Solicitors. You can contact the team at civilandcommercialcosts@clarionsolicitors.com