Report comment

This decision is surely wrong.

The point at stake is whether the change was reasonable. IM were acting for their Client; neither the Defendant nor the DJ was so doing. What IM's client may or may not have thought, or been advised is irrelevant to that single point.

If IM's client was deprived of a greater quantum is not for that Court to decide, but for one judging whether IM had been negligent. If the DJ felt IM had been unprofessional then he should raise the matter with the SRA (has he?) not penalise on costs.

This seems like a case of anti solicitor judges using the overly complicated costs regime to vent their fury on the profession.