On 15 May 2018, the Court of Appeal published its judgment in the joint appeals of the P&P Property and Dreamvar cases. Both cases focus on the liability of solicitors where the purported seller of a property is in fact an imposter. Elisabeth Ross considers the cases’ impact.
Can a claimant who has instructed solicitors on legal aid, switch to a CFA and recover the success fee and ATE premium? Imran Benson of Hailsham Chambers discusses the Court of Appeal (CA) judgment in Surrey v Barnet & Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust  EWCA Civ 451.
The Supreme Court has ruled against treating a litigant in person as a special case and says the rules as they stand must apply equally to all parties.
Alison Kirby analyses this judgment in which the High Court has considered, for the first time, whether the Arkin cap - the principle that a funder’s potential liability for adverse costs will be limited to the amount of the funding provided - still fits.
Kerry Underwood dissects two recent judgments that could have significant implications for third party funders.
Kerry Underwood looks at where we stand with part 36 in light of recent judgments and Lord Justice Jackson’s proposals on fixed recoverable costs.
Andy Ellis, managing director of Practico Ltd, reacts to the Court of Appeal decision in BNM v MGN on proportionality.
With Inheritance Act claims and will disputes being the order of the day in the first few months of the year, trusts, anonymity and judicial discretion seem to be the flavour of the spring and summer months.
James Perry provides commentary on Wiseman v Marston’s Plc.
Iain Stark, chairman of the Association of Costs Lawyers and a partner at Weightmans, explains why Harrison reinforces the need to ensure proper consideration is given to budgets.