Family Flyer 102

“NEEDS” – No Hiding Place on Costs for Exaggerated Claims – an analysis of Peel J in WC v HC (2022) EWFC 40

In the Ashley Murray Chambers Case Update No 100 (‘TIME OUT- ABIDE BY THE RULES – OR ELSE! – analysis of WC v HC [2022] EWFC 22’) the substantive decision of Peel J in this matter was fully analysed. The Court determined W on a “needs” based approach should recover value of £7.45m. Subsequently, the parties addressed the consequential costs arguments. The combined costs amounted to £1.6m (W £917k and H £709k – the main difference in amounts being that H was not liable for vat).

H sought costs from W of £310k and W sought costs of £264k from H, being her costs of two interlocutory hearings (mps and directions) and in meeting H’s arguments as to the application of an unsigned post marital agreement. 

To view the full flyer please click here.