Malcolm Cohen & Ors v Co-operative Group Limited & Ors

On a standard-basis costs assessment, the paying party is liable only for costs that are reasonable and proportionate to the litigation, rather than all work actually undertaken or billable to the receiving party’s client.

The court may assess costs in broad terms where detailed objections identify excessive time spent by multiple fee-earners. The assessment should reflect the seriousness and complexity of the application, while avoiding recovery of unreasonably high amounts. A percentage reduction may be applied to solicitors’ costs where that is an appropriate overall evaluation.

The joint liquidators of The Food Retailer Operations Limited were liable for the respondents’ costs of an application concerning reliance on expert evidence. The underlying judgment had established that the applicants should pay those costs on the standard basis.

The respondents claimed total costs of £137,492. The applicants challenged the reasonableness of the time claimed for attendances, hearing attendance by three solicitors, document work, preparation of evidence and costs documentation. The issue before the court was the proper quantum of the respondents’ costs on summary assessment.

1. The respondents were entitled to their costs of the application, assessed on the standard basis. The application was heavy litigation and properly involved leading counsel on each side, but the total claimed was higher than would ordinarily be reasonable on that basis.

2. The relevant question was what was properly chargeable to the paying party. It was distinct from the amount of work actually performed or properly billable by the solicitors to their own clients. The hours claimed in several categories were unreasonably high, including attendances on counsel or the court, attendance at the hearing by three solicitors, document work and preparation of the response and costs statement.

3. The assessment was conducted in broad terms, taking account of the serious nature of the application and the need to deal with it thoroughly. The solicitors’ costs were reduced by one-third to reflect unreasonably high amounts of time claimed for multiple fee-earners.

4. There was no adjustment to counsel’s fees or disbursements. Two-thirds of the respondents’ solicitors’ costs, together with counsel’s fees and disbursements, constituted the assessed costs.