0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

Flower 1 - 800 Flowers INC v Phone Names Limited

16 July 2001
The issues

Costs – Summary Assessment

The facts

The case involved a trademark dispute. Mr Justice Jacob summarily assessed phone names costs under Part 43 of the Civil Procedure Rules at £10,000.00. One – 800 Flowers Inc appealed.

The decision

1. When similarly assessing costs the Court should look at the detailed breakdown of costs actually incurred by the party in question and it should carry out its assessment by reference to the items appearing there.

2. In doing so the Court might find it helpful to rely on its experience of summary assessment of costs in comparable cases.

3. In assessing the costs on that basis the Court might also find it helpful to look at the total sum at which it is arrived in order to see whether that sum fell in the bounds of what was reasonable and proportionate.

4. If the Court considered the total sum to be unreasonable or disproportionate, it might want to look again at the detailed items to see what further reduction should be made. What was not permissible was for the Judge, having concluded that the total of the detailed items was too high, to apply his own “tariff” derived from another case with which he had dealt. This was the wrong approach. However broad the brush used by the Court the assessment must be directed upon the actual breakdown of costs contained in the receiving party’s statement.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


Legal updates

Non-payment of insurance premiums during the Coronavirus pandemic

The forced closure of many businesses as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Recent reports from the Office for National Statistics state that the economy was 25% smaller in April than it was in February this year.


Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up