9 December 2019 by John
Hyde
Costs recovery ruling hits translation
company
A translation company owner has said she may have to
pull out of the market following a Court of Appeal ruling inhibiting costs
recovery.
In Aldred v Cham, Lord
Justice Coulson said the status of the claimant as a child, or as someone who
could not speak English, was ‘nothing whatever to do with the dispute itself’.
He upheld the appeal by the defendant in the RTA claim to deny recovery of
disbursements for work that did not fall within the fixed recoverable costs
regime.
Required to interpret
the line in the Civil Procedure Rules which allows recovery where sums have
been ‘reasonably incurred due to a particular feature of the dispute’, the
judge said: ‘Age, linguistic ability and mental wellbeing are all
characteristics of the claimant regardless of the dispute. They are not
generated by or linked in any way to the dispute itself.’
While the appeal
itself centred mostly around counsel fees, businesses supplying the PI sector
now fear collateral damage because claimants will not be able to cover the
costs of using external providers.
The owner of one
translation company working extensively with the PI sector told the Gazette her business has
outstanding invoices with a number of legal services providers but she has no idea
if these will be paid.
‘Since the decision
of Aldred v Cham
in the Court of Appeal came to light, it sunk us overnight as most of our
outstanding invoices are no longer recoverable and we have to re-evaluate our
position in the current market.’
The Gazette has contacted the
claimant’s firm, Leeds-based True Solicitors, to ask if an appeal is being
considered.
Matthew Hoe, director
of dispute resolution at Taylor Rose TTKW, who acted for Aldred, said the
judgment promotes certainty by cutting down the scope of argument about what
can be recovered – although it could reopen calls to review the level of fixed
costs.
No comments:
Post a Comment