Barking, Havering & Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (def/resp) v AKC (a protected party by litigation friend MCK) (claimant/appellant)
Tuesday 12 April 2022
The Claimant (C) appeals against the order of Steyn J dated 29/9/21 allowing the D’s appeal from the order of costs judge (Master Nagalingam).
Steyn J overturned the Master’s order and ordered that the bills of costs of the C be struck out for non-compliance with CPR: she ordered that they be redrawn.
C had made a clinical negligence claim against D arising from treatment of a cerebral arteriovenous malformation in 2012. Liability and liability costs were settled. Thereafter quantum was settled, the settlement being approved by the Court on 7/3/19.
C began detailed assessment proceedings in respect of quantum costs on 8/8/19. The bill of costs comprised an old format paper bill for work undertaken until 6/4/18 and a new format electronic bill covering costs thereafter. This reflected the terms of CPR 47PD para 5.1 which requires electronic bill for costs after 6/4/18 but permits a paper bill for costs prior to that date.
C submits that the judge imposed her own interpretation on the wording of CPR concerning the format and content of a bill of costs. She considered that the bill of costs could not be properly assessed and that the bill of costs should be struck out and re-drafted.