0370 270 6000

Giambroni v J M C Holidays Limited (Mr Morland J on appeal from Cost Judge Campbell)

2 January 2003
The issues

Costs – generic letters – proportionality.

The facts

Claimants/receiving party appealed against the decision of Cost Judge Campbell in which he disallowed or reduced items in Claimant’s Bill of Costs.

The decision

1. A number of such reductions or disallowances were made on the grounds that they were disproportionate not withstanding that at a preliminary hearing a decision had been made by the Cost Judge that the Bills were not disproportionate as a whole. A ruling at the outset of the Detailed Assessment with the Bill as a whole is not disproportionate did not preclude a Cost Judge from deciding that individual items were disproportionate.

2. The preliminary Judgment on proportionality determined the manner in which the Detailed Assessment was to be carried out but did not determine the final sum to be awarded.

3. The guidelines in Home Office -v- Lownds apply to an interim assessment in group litigation.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.



Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.


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.


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