The owners of this site offer no guarantee or responsibility for the accuracy of
the information and views contained within the articles published on the site. By
using this site you agree to be bound by its Terms & Conditions.
Crane v Canons Leisure  EWCA Civ 1352
The Court of Appeal considered the SCCO judgment of Master Wright who ruled that
costs draftsmen’s fees which fell squarely within the definition of a disbursement
could only be recovered between the parties as a disbursement. No success fee could
therefore be recovered on those fees.
The Court of Appeal disagreed. The CCFA provided for work done by the solicitors
to be charged on an hourly rate and, in addition, a success fee applied to those
fees. The work done by the costs draftsmen was clearly solicitors’ work. The solicitors
still retained control and responsibility over that work. That was a key point.
As to the amount of the success fee recoverable the Defendants sought to argue that
a lower success fee should apply. The Court disagreed and followed KU v Liverpool
City Council  EWCA Civ 475. The Court did not have the power to rewrite the
CCFA so as to provide for a lower or no success fee in respect of the costs-only
proceedings. There was no reason for party who had entered into a CFA to have separately
assessed the risks of costs proceedings at the outset.