|
|
![]() Helping San Diego, California and beyond since 1997.
|
|
Click here and add this page to your favorites!

|
Encyclopedia Britannica - Main :: COR-CRE |
|
|
COSTS , a term used in English law to denote the expenses incurred (I) in employing a lawyer in his professional capacity for purposes other than litigation; (2) in instituting and carrying on litigation whether with or without the aid of a lawyer. Solicitor and Client.The retainer of a solicitor implies a contract to pay to him his proper charges and disbursements with respect to the work done by him as a solicitor. In cases of conveyancing his remuneration is now for the most part regulated by scales ad valorem on the value of the property dealt with (Solicitors' Remuneration Order 1882), and clients are free to make written agreements for the conduct of any class of non-litigious business, fixing the costs by a percentage on the value of the amount involved. So far as litigious business is concerned, the arrangement known as "no cure no pay" is objected to by the courts and the profession as leading to speculative actions, and stipulations as to a share of the proceeds of a successful action are champertous and illegal. An English solicitor's bill drawn
The High Court has a threefold jurisdiction to deal with solicitors' costs:(I) by virtue of its jurisdiction over them as its officers; (2) statutory, under the Solicitors Act 1843 and other legislation; (3) ordinary, to ascertain the reasonableness of charges made the subject of a claim. The client can, as a matter of course, get an order-for taxation within a month of the delivery of the solicitor's bill, and either client or solicitor can get such an order as of course within twelve months of delivery. After expiry of that time the court may order taxation if the special
late
Costs as between solicitor and client are taxed in the same office as litigious costs, and objections to the decisions of the taxing officer, if properly made, can be taken for review to a judge of the High Court and to the Court of Appeal. Litigious Costs.The expenses of litigation fall in the first instance on the person who undertakes the proceedings or retains and employs the lawyer. It is in accordance with the ordinary ideas of justice that the expenses of the successful party to litigation should be defrayed by the unsuccessful party, a notion ex-pressed in the phrase that " costs follow the event." But there are many special
Except as regards appeals to the House
House
In the judicial committee of the privy council the power to award, in its discretion, costs on appeals from the colonies or other matters referred to it, is given by 15 of the Judicial Committee Act 1833; and the costs are taxed by the registrar of the council. Courts, of equity have always claimed a discretion independently of statute to give or refuse costs, but as a general rule the maxim of the civil law, victus victori in expensis condemnatus est, was followed. The successful party was recognized to have a prima facie claim to costs, but the court might, on sufficient cause shown, not only deprive him of his costs, but even in some rare cases order him to pay the costs of his unsuccessful opponent. There was a class of cases in which the court generally gave costs to parties sustaining a certain character, whatever might be the result of the suit (e.g. trustees, executors and mortgagees). In the courts of common law, costs were not given either to plaintiff or defendant, although the damages given to a successful plaintiff might suffice to cover not only the loss sustained by the wrong done, but also the expense he had been put to in taking proceedings. The defendant in a baseless or vexatious action could not even recover his costs thus indirectly, and the indirect costs given to a plaintiff under the name of damages were often inadequate and uncertain. Costs were first given under the Statute of Gloucester (1277, 6 Edward I. c. 1), which enacted that " the demandant shall recover damages in an assize of novel disseisin and in writs of mort d'ancestor, cosinage, aiel and beziel, and further that the demandant may recover against the tenant
chivalry (52 Henry III. c. 6); but costs were not given generally to successful defendants until 1531(23 Henry VIII. c. 15), when it was enacted that " if in the actions therein mentioned the plaintiff after appearance of the defendant be non-suited, or any verdict happen to pass by lawful trial against the plaintiff, the defendant shall have judgment to recover his costs against the plaintiff, to be assessed and taxed at the discretion of the court, and shall have such process and execution for the recovery and paying his costs against the plaintiff, as the plaintiff should or might have had against the defendant, in case the judgment had been given for the plaintiff." In 16o6 by 4 James I. c. 3, this " good and profitable law " was extended to other actions not originally specified, although within the mischief of the act, so that in any action wherein the plaintiff might have costs if judgment were given for him, the defendant if successful should have costs against the plaintiff. The policy of these enactments is expressed to be the discouragement of frivolous and unjust suits. This policy was carried out by other and later acts. The Limitations Act 1623, 6, ordered that if the plaintiff in an action of slander
interest
All these enactments have been superseded by the Judicature Acts, but in the case of slander
Supreme Court.The general rule now in force in the Supreme Court of Judicature is as follows:" Subject to the provisions of the Judicature Acts and the rules of the court made thereunder, and to the express provision of any statute whether passed before or after the 14th of August 189o, the costs of and incident to all proceedings in the Supreme Court, including the administration of estates and trusts, shall be in the discretion of the court or judge, and the court or judge shall have full power to determine by whom and to what extent such costs are to be paid. Provided (1) that nothing herein contained shall deprive an executor, administrator, trustee or mortgagee who has not unreasonably carried on or resisted any proceedings of any right to costs out of a particular estate or fund to which he would be entitled under the rules hitherto (i.e. before 1883) acted upon in the chancery division as successor of the court of chancery; (2) that where an action, cause, matter or issue is tried with a jury, the costs shall follow the event unless the judge who tried the case or the court shall for good cause otherwise order." (R.S.C.,O. 65, r. I.) The rule above stated applies to civil proceedings on the crown side of the king's bench division, including mandamus, prohibition quo warranto, and certiorari (R. v. Woodhouse, 1906, 2 K.B. 502, 540); and to proceedings on the revenue side of that division (O. 68, r. 1); but it does not apply to criminal proceedings in the High Court, which are regulated by the crown office rules of 1906, or by statutes dealing with particular breaches of the law, and as to procedure in taxing costs by 0. 65, r. 27, of the Rules of the Supreme Court. The rule is also subject to specific provision empowering the courts to limit the costs to be adjudged against the unsuccessful party in proceedings in the High Court, which could and should have been instituted in a county court, e.g. actions of contract under roo, or actions of tort in which less than 10 is recovered (County Courts Act 1888, 65, 66, 116; County Courts Act 1903, 3). For instance, in actions falling within the Public Authorities Protection Act 1893 against public bodies or officials, the defendant, if successful, is entitled to recover costs as between solicitor and client unless a special order to the contrary is made COSTUME accused person, if convicted, to pay the costs of his prosecution (Forfeiture Act 1870); and the like power exists as to persons convicted of offences indictable under the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 (see 18), and as to persons convicted on indictment of assault, corrupt practices at elections, offences against the Merchandise Marks Acts, or of defamatory libel, if they have unsuccessfully pleaded jurisdiction. Provision is also made for the payment out of the local rate of the district of the costs of prosecuting all felonies (except treason-felony) and a number of misdemeanours. A list
Where a prosecution or indictment fails, the prosecutor cannot as a rule be made to pay the costs of the defence: except in cases within the Vexatious Indictments Act 1859 and its amendments (i.e. where he has, after a refusal by justices to commit for trial, insisted on continuing the prosecution) ; or where a defamatory libel is successfully justified, or where prosecutions in respect of merchandise marks or corrupt practices at elections have failed. (W. F. C.) End of Article: COSTS If you wish, you can link directly to this article.
<a href="http://jcsm.org/StudyCenter/Encyclopedia/COR_CRE/COSTS.html"> COSTS </a> |
|
|
(Previous) COSTELLO, DUDLEY (1803-1865) |
(Next) COSTUME |
|
Sponsored Advertisements