No order as to the costs of either application or hearing - Meaning?

[bewillded]

Can anyone explain what this means? I'm in an ongoing case and the costs order was made very early on, i now notice that the solictors are now including items for pre action in their costs and thought that these had been wiped out by the order made but now i'm not so sure so if anyonecan explain the above wording i would be very grateful.

[AndyOrch]

The most common interim costs orders you will come across at an interim hearing in a civil case are as follows:

 

Costs in any event - The party in whose favour the Order is made will recover their legal costs of the interim hearing from the other side irrespective of who wins at trial.

 

Costs in the case - Whichever side obtains a costs Order at trial will also recover the costs of the interim hearing from the other side.

 

Costs in the application - Whichever side obtains a costs order in the application will also recover the costs of the interim hearing from the other side (this usually applies where the initial hearing is adjourned to a later date)

[AndyOrch]

Claimant's costs in the case/application - If the Claimant is awarded costs at trial they will also recover the costs of the interim hearing. If the Defendant is awarded costs at trial the Claimant will not have to pay the costs of the application.

 

Defendant's costs in the case/application - If the Defendant is awarded costs at trial they will also recover the costs of the interim hearing. If the Claimant is awarded costs at trial the Defendant will not have to pay the costs of the application.

 

Costs reserved - The decision about who should pay the costs is deferred to a later date and if not dealt with then "costs in the case" applies.

 

Costs thrown away - This is another version of costs in the application, but reflects the fact that one side has caused unnecessary costs to be incurred and should therefore pay them.

 

No Order as to costs - If the judge makes this Order or is silent on costs then neither party is entitled to recover their costs from the other.

 

Wasted costs - This is a harsher version of costs thrown away, where the Court believes the costs should be paid by the lawyer and not the client. It usually follows a failure to comply with proper or standard procedure by the lawyer. The lawyer may seek to avoid this by making it clear they will pay the costs without an Order anyway. If the Court is thinking of making a wasted costs Order then the solicitor or barrister is normally entitled to a hearing on the issue first.

 

Costs of and caused by - This will normally make it clear who has to pay the costs and why. It reflects a party having to pay charges for something they have done or should have done.

[bewillded]

thanks for this. what does the either application or hearing mean in relation to costs? the costs at this point were £39000 have they been wiped out forever?

[AndyOrch]

Simply that no costs will be allowed for either the hearing or the application as a separate issue to the main case.

[bewillded]

so am i correct in thinking not all the pre action costs will be voided out, just the cots relating to the hearing and the counsels fees for attending?

[AndyOrch]

Correct