Firm entitled to 75% of its costs after fighting off professional negligence claim

A Yorkshire-based firm has been awarded 75% of its costs after seeing off a professional negligence claim.

A total of 43 claimants, all companies in liquidation with a deficiency to creditors of more than £68m, had accused Lupton Fawcett LLP, Metis Law and Metis Law Partners LLP of professional negligence. Their claim was dismissed by summary judgment and the claims against Lupton Fawcett struck out by the High Court in April this year.

In a consequential matters judgment in Afan Valley Limited v Lupton Fawcett (a firm) & Ors, Mr Justice Sheldon said the claimants were ‘well aware’ that the entire claim was vulnerable to being dismissed.

Finding Lupton Fawcett should receive a ‘large proportion’ of those costs, the judge said: ‘LF was the overall victor and it had telegraphed to the claimants early on the very point on which the strike out/summary judgment application was successful. Nevertheless, it would be inappropriate for LF to be awarded all of its costs as this would not reflect the overall justice in this case.

‘There were points on which LF lost at the hearing before me in February that were not merely legal arguments that required little in the way of evidence or submissions, but were matters that were wholly independent of the successful no loss argument and put the claimants to significant cost and effort in preparing witness evidence and written argument.’

He added a reduction of 25% was appropriate ‘in an attempt to meet the overall justice in this case, and acknowledging the considerable success that LF had overall’. 

The judge ordered that Lupton Fawcett should be entitled to 75% of its costs of the strike out/summary judgment application including the costs of dealing with the amendments and the claimant’s application to amend, which was unsuccessful. The claimants must pay 50% of the firm’s costs as an interim payment as ‘given the amount of the costs that have been incurred, there is a possibility that LF’s costs will be reduced significantly on detailed assessment’.

Metis is also entitled to its costs and an order for interim payment of 50% was made. The judge found the claimants should bear the costs thrown away by both firms in relation to the adjournment costs.

James Pickering KC and Paul O’Doherty, instructed by Hewlett Swanson, appeared for the claimants. Daniel Saoul KC, instructed by RPC, represented Lupton Fawcett and Ben Hubble KC and Michael Bowmer, instructed by Keoghs, appeared for Metis Law and Metis Law Partnership.