The case of BNM v MGN Limited  EWHC B13 was decided in June of this year.
In BNM, Master Gordon-Saker assessed a bill of costs in the sum of £241,817.00 down to £167,389.45. He then went on to consider the proportionality arguments raised by the Defendant, applying the new proportionality test.
The damages were agreed in the sum of £20,000.00 in this matter and the Master considered the costs to remain disproportionate after the assessment. He therefore applied a further discount and came to the conclusion that the figure of £83,964.80 was reasonable and proportionate.
Upon applying the new proportionality test, the Master considered the ATE premium separately from the remainder of the costs. Both the costs in general and the ATE premium were found to be disproportionate.
The costs were reduced from £105,909.45 to £53,964.80 and the ATE premium was reduced from £61,480.00 to £30,000.00. Interestingly, and perhaps worryingly, the ATE premium was allowed in full following the original assessment and then reduced by more than 50% when applying the proportionality test.
Unsurprisingly, the Claimant appealed and the matter has been set down for a hearing on 5 December 2016. Watch this space!
7/10/2016 06:57:33 pm
I'd be surprised if they interfere with the original assessment but we shall see.
Leave a Reply.