A Reminder That Interlocutory Cost Orders Can Be Made Against QOCS Protected Claimants - Grace Corby, Temple Garden Chambers
14/12/22. Atmani & Ors v Royal Borough of Kensington & Ors [2022] EWHC 2618 (KB) - The court considered the costs consequences of the decisions made in a CMC. The court ordered ‘defendant’s costs in the case’, following some of the claimants’ unsuccessful applications. In doing so, the court affirmed that the QOCS regime did not prevent such interlocutory orders, it just prevented their enforcement.
Background
The claims themselves all relate to the Grenfell Tower fire on 14 June 2017 which caused loss of life to 72 people, and injury, suffering and trauma to many residents, occupiers or visitors who were in the Tower or the vicinity of the Tower, as well as to emergency responders dealing with the fire and its aftermath. The overall litigation involves many parties, with multiple claimant groups and approximately 1,125 claimants in total.
This costs decision simply concerned the costs of some applications following a CMC. In particular, the dispute was between the claimants represented by Bishop Lloyd & Jackson (“the BLJ Claimants”) and the defendant Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (“RBKC”)...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/VV Shots