High Court Orders £106,000 Payment Before Final Legal Costs Assessment

A recent High Court decision has reinforced an important principle: a successful party should not usually have to wait until every legal cost has been assessed before receiving a reasonable payment.

High Court Decision

While winning a case can bring relief to the successful party, recouping the costs of bringing the case is not always easy. Even where the party is ordered by the court to pay the other party’s legal costs, there can be some delay in ascertaining the final sum of the costs.

A recent High Court decision has reinforced an important principle: a successful party should not usually have to wait until every legal cost has been assessed before receiving a reasonable payment.

In the case of Ocorian Private Trustees (Jersey) Ltd v McGeoch [2026] EWHC 1693 (Ch), the High Court ordered a £106,000 payment towards legal costs, even though the final amount was subject to assessment.

What Happened in the Case?

The case arose from possession proceedings involving a property. Ocorian Private Trustees (Jersey) Ltd. successfully appealed an earlier court decision, with the High Court ordering the opposing party, Julia McGeoch, to pay the legal costs of both the appeal and the underlying proceedings.

However, the exact amount recoverable had not been agreed or formally assessed yet.

Therefore, Ocorian requested an interim payment towards its legal costs rather than waiting for the assessment process to conclude.

The opposing party objected to paying at that stage, which raised questions about how much should reasonably be paid before the final costs were made clear.

What Does CPR 44.2(8) Mean?

Under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), which outline how civil court cases are managed in England and Wales, CPR 44.2(8) states that where the party is ordered to pay legal costs subject to detailed assessment, the court will order a reasonable payment towards those costs unless there is a good reason not to.

A detailed assessment is the process of reviewing the legal costs claimed, in order to determine how much the paying party should be required to pay.

Because this process takes time, the rule helps prevent successful parties from being left waiting unnecessarily for money they are likely to recover.

While considering the case, HHJ Paul Mathews referred to an earlier decision in Mars (UK) Ltd. v Teknowledge Ltd. [1999], which established the underlying principle:

“The successful is entitled to the money. In principle he ought to get it as soon as possible.”

The conclusion of the Judge was that simply questioning the percentage requested was not a sufficient reason to refuse an interim payment altogether.

The question became: ‘how much should reasonably be awarded?’

How Did the Court Decide on £106,000?

Ocorian reported total legal costs of approximately £216,000, including VAT, and requested an interim payment of £108,000m, representing half of that amount.

However, the evidence supporting those costs wasn’t consistent.

The company provided these schedules of legal costs, certified by its solicitors, which totalled at £98,053.08. These related to the earlier court hearing as well as the appeal afterwards.

The rest of the costs formed part of the overall £216,000 claim but were not supported by the same level of certification.

The judge considered this distinction important. Although both categories of the costs could be taken into account, the certified figures provided more confidence when determining a reasonable interim payment.

The court therefore awarded:

• £60,000 towards the solicitor-certified costs, approximately 60% of the amount claimed in those schedules.
• £46,000 towards the remaining uncertified costs, approximately 40% of that amount.

This resulted in a total interim payment of £106,000, which the opposition party was ordered to pay within 14 days.

The judge also acknowledged that the respondent had contested many aspects of the proceedings, requiring extensive legal work from the successful party.

Importantly, the £106,000 payment was not the final determining factor of the recoverable costs. A detailed assessment process would still provide an opportunity for the paying party to challenge the amounts claimed.

Why is This Decision Important?

The ruling provides useful clarification on how courts may approach interim payments towards legal costs, particularly where there is no agreed figure on costs or approved costs budget.

It highlights three important considerations:

• Successful parties shouldn’t face unnecessary delays. The fact that a detailed assessment is still required does not justify withholding payment.
• The supporting evidence matters. Costs supported by solicitor-certified schedules will likely carry greater weight when the court decides how much should be paid.
• Both parties will remain protected. An interim payment allows the successful party to recover a reasonable amount quickly, while the detailed assessment process ensures that the final costs can still be scrutinised.

The decision also shows that courts do not have to apply a single percentage across an entire costs claim. They can consider the strength of the evidence available and determine an appropriate amount for different categories of costs, instead.

Understanding Legal Costs and Your Rights

Legal costs can be an important consideration in any civil dispute. Understanding when costs can be recovered, how they’re assessed and whether an interim payment may be appropriate can help parties make informed decisions throughout the legal process.

At Bond Turner, the specialists in our Costs team work alongside our legal professionals to manage the assessment, negotiation and recovery of legal costs. Our experience in complex litigation helps ensure that the costs are considered carefully and that appropriate steps are taken to secure recovery.