3
Guidance on new cost‐capping rules ‐ Dame Vivienne Westwood OBE v Anthony Edward Knight [2011] EWPCC 011 The first judgement to apply the new Patents County Court (‘PCC’) cost capping provisions has been handed down by His Honour Judge Birss QC in Westwood v Knight. In a passing off, trade mark and copyright infringement case, British designer Dame Vivienne Westwood O.B.E. (‘the Claimant’), was awarded £60,625 in costs, just over half of her incurred costs. Background On 1 October 2010, new rules were introduced to reform the procedures in the PCC. In particular, Part 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules (Scale Costs for Claims in a PCC) placed a £50,000 cap on costs payable by one party to another (except in certain limited cases relating to the abuse of process or when the validity of a patent or design registration is tested). The Claimant originally issued proceedings in the High Court in June 2010 but the case was transferred to the PCC when the new rules came into force in October 2010. Summary The new PCC rules limit cost awards in two ways (1) there is an overall cap of £50,000 on costs payable by one party to another; and (2) there are caps at various stages of the proceedings (as set by the Costs Practice Direction). Judge Birss provided the following guidance: The new PCC rules form a “package of measures” which are intended to apply as a whole. The cost capping rules do not apply to costs incurred in circumstances in which the rest of the package of measures did not apply. For example, costs incurred in the High Court before the case in question was transferred to the PCC are not caught by Part 45. While the new PCC rules provide that the court has a discretion as to the amount of costs awarded, the limits at the various stages and the overall £50 000 cap are intended to be adhered to. Only in very rare circumstances should limits be exceeded. Once the court had decided that costs are payable by one party to another, it will make a summary assessment of the costs of the winning party. In order to conduct the assessment the winning party will need to provide a schedule of costs broken down by stages corresponding to the stages set out in the new PCC rules. Each stage must then be considered separately. The amount of the costs awarded by the court will depend on the nature and complexity of the claim. If the summarily assessed figure for a given stage is less than the maximum limit for that stage, then the assessed figure will be used. If the summarily assessed figure is more than the maximum limit for a given stage, then the maximum limit will be used. No costs other than costs attributable to the stages set out in the rules may be awarded. The court must not, however, take too narrow a view of the scope of these stages. Costs incurred before the action starts, for example, may be regarded as part of the Defence and Counterclaim. Fees for considering the other side’s claim / defence / counter‐claim may also be acceptable.

Guidance on new cost‐capping rules ‐ Dame Vivienne ...sipara.com/downloads/Guidance on new cost-capping... · Guidance on new cost‐capping rules ‐ Dame Vivienne Westwood OBE

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    1

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Guidance on new cost‐capping rules ‐ Dame Vivienne ...sipara.com/downloads/Guidance on new cost-capping... · Guidance on new cost‐capping rules ‐ Dame Vivienne Westwood OBE

 

 

Guidance on new cost‐capping rules ‐ Dame Vivienne Westwood OBE v Anthony Edward Knight [2011] EWPCC 011 

The first judgement to apply the new Patents County Court (‘PCC’) cost capping provisions has been handed down by His Honour Judge Birss QC in Westwood v Knight.  In a passing off, trade mark and copyright infringement case, British designer Dame Vivienne Westwood O.B.E.  (‘the Claimant’), was awarded £60,625 in costs,  just over half of her incurred costs.  

Background 

On 1 October 2010, new rules were introduced to reform the procedures in the PCC.  In particular, Part 45 of the Civil Procedure Rules (Scale Costs for Claims in a PCC) placed a £50,000 cap on costs payable by one party to another (except in certain limited cases relating to the abuse of process or when the validity of a patent or design registration is tested).  

The Claimant originally issued  proceedings in the High Court in June 2010 but the case was transferred to the PCC when the new rules came into force in October 2010.  

Summary  

The new PCC rules limit cost awards in two ways (1) there is an overall cap of £50,000 on costs payable by one party to another; and (2) there are caps at various stages of the proceedings (as set by the Costs Practice Direction).  

Judge Birss provided the following guidance: 

• The new PCC rules form a “package of measures” which are intended to apply as a whole. The cost capping rules do not apply to costs incurred in circumstances in which the rest of the package of measures did not apply.  For example, costs incurred in the High Court before the case in question was transferred to the PCC are not caught by Part 45.   

• While the new PCC rules provide that the court has a discretion as to the amount of costs awarded, the limits at the various stages and the overall £50 000 cap are intended to be adhered to. Only in very rare circumstances should limits be exceeded.  

• Once the court had decided  that costs are payable by one party to another, it will make a summary assessment of the costs of the winning party.  In order to conduct the assessment the winning party will need to provide a schedule of costs broken down by stages corresponding to the stages set out in the new PCC rules. Each stage must then be considered separately.  The amount of the costs awarded by the court will depend on the nature and complexity of the claim. 

• If the summarily assessed figure for a given stage is less than the maximum limit for that stage, then the assessed figure will be used.  If the summarily assessed figure is more than the maximum limit for a given stage, then the maximum limit will be used.   

• No costs other than costs attributable to the stages set out in the rules may be awarded.  The court must not, however, take too narrow a view of the scope of these stages. Costs incurred before the action starts, for example, may be regarded as part of the Defence and Counterclaim.  Fees for considering the other side’s claim / defence / counter‐claim may also be acceptable.  

Page 2: Guidance on new cost‐capping rules ‐ Dame Vivienne ...sipara.com/downloads/Guidance on new cost-capping... · Guidance on new cost‐capping rules ‐ Dame Vivienne Westwood OBE

 

 

• There is no provision for general costs of the action to be included.  

• The limits are net of VAT such that the winning party recovers VAT in addition to the amount of scale costs. Guidance was given on how VAT should be calculated when only part of the sum awarded attracts VAT. 

Applying the above guidance to what he considered a fairly factually complicated case, Judge Birss awarded a total of £60,625 to the Claimant, broken down as follows: 

Applicable stages for trial on liability as per Table A in Section 25C of the Costs Practice Direction 

Sum incurred 

Summary assessment 

Cost Cap as per Table A 

Sum due 

Costs incurred in High Court*  £33,069  £25,000  ‐  £25,000 

Defence (considering defences)  £11,325  £8,000  £6,125  £6,125 

CMC  £8,783  £6,500  £2,500  £2,500 

Application to amend Particulars of Claim  (Red Planet Westwood) 

£2,837  £2,000  £2,500  £2,000 

Preparing witness statements  £26,009  £20,000  £5,000  £5,000 

Application to amend Particulars of Claim (Too fast to live) 

£3,411  £2,500  £2,500  £2,500 

Defendant's pre trial applications  £2,983  £2,500  £2,500  £2,500 

Trial and judgment  £25,116  £20,000  £15,000  £15,000 

Totals  £113,533  £86,500  £36,125  £60,625 

*As outlined above, the fees incurred in the initial High Court action fall outside the scope of the PCC cost‐capping measures which explains why the total cost awarded to the Claimant exceeds the £50,000 cap.  

 

 

 

Page 3: Guidance on new cost‐capping rules ‐ Dame Vivienne ...sipara.com/downloads/Guidance on new cost-capping... · Guidance on new cost‐capping rules ‐ Dame Vivienne Westwood OBE

 

 

Comment 

Judge Birss’ practical approach to the application of the new cost capping rules is welcomed.  The emphasis on remaining within the limits of the cap show the court’s commitment to the aim of the new costs structure, that is, to give a measure of certainty to litigants as to their likely costs exposure.   

 

 

 

 

 

Sipara   ●   T: +44 (0)1235 436280   ●   E: [email protected]   ●   W: www.sipara.com