Robin is instructed by both paying and receiving parties in all issues relating to costs and is particularly sought after in cases which are unusual or involve novel points of law.
In addition to his inter-partes practice he has specialised in solicitor/client disputes for many years and has appeared in many of the leading cases in relation to this specialist area of the law.
He has appeared at all levels up to and including the court of appeal and has advised and made written submissions in respect of costs issues in supreme court cases.
The majority of his work in detailed assessments relates to six or seven figure bills of costs or cases involving points of principle. He is regularly instructed in test cases and on appeal (both first and second appeals).
Robin regularly speaks at industry conferences on costs.
Selected cases:
- Vardy v Rooney: Robin acted as sole counsel for Coleen Rooney throughout this highly contentious detailed assessment of costs worth over £1.8m.
- Ingram v Singh [2025] EWCA Civ 264: Court of appeal decision concerning whether a retainer between a liquidator and his solicitor was retrospective in scope.
- Pan NOx Emissions Litigations, Re [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB): Constable J and the Senior Costs Judge. Robin appeared for one of the Defendants in the Pan-NOx costs management exercise; the largest in the history of the English courts. The Claimants’ total budgets were claimed at £342m. Their estimated costs were reduced from a total of £207m to £51m.
- Isah, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 268: Court of Appeal decision regarding whether a judge who makes an order for summary assessment of costs must conduct the summary assessment itself (or whether another judge may do so).
- TRX v Southampton Football Club [2022] EWHC 3392 (KB): High Court appeal (Stacey J). The proper application of r.47.20 (costs of detailed assessments) in respect of Part 36. Also consideration of whether a pre CFA retainer was valid.
- SGI Legal LLP v Karatysz [2022] EWCA Civ 1388: Court of Appeal decision concerning solicitor and client costs (the form and amount of a solicitor’s bill where there had been a deduction form damages for the purpose of the “one fifth” rule).
- Belsner v Cam Legal Services Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1387: With PJ Kirby KC. Leading judgment considering the nature of contentious / non-contentious business, s.74(3) of the Solicitors Act and fiduciary duties of a solicitor when entering a retainer.
- Jones v Richard Slade and Company Ltd [2022] EWHC 1968 (QB): High Court appeal (Johnson J) concerning the scope of detailed assessment and whether certain issues were beyond scrutiny in a solicitor and client assessment.
- Edwards & Ors v Slater & Gordon, Raubenheimer v Slater & Gordon [2022] EWHC 1091 (QB): High Court appeal (Ritchie J). Disclosure and security for costs within solicitor and client assessment as well as consideration of whether a CFA providing for an indemnity as to costs was a contract of insurance (Edwards). The appropriateness of Part 18 questions involving ATE insurance within solicitor and client assessments and the status of the solicitor’s cash account (Raubenheimer).
- Richard Slade v Erlam [2022] EWHC 325 (QB) : High Court (QBD) appeal in a solicitor and client assessment. Whether a private retainer and a CFA allowed for interim statute bills to be delivered. Also consideration of Chamberlain Bills and special circumstances.
- Murray & Anor v Richard Slade and Company Ltd [2021] EWHC 3383 (QB): High Court (QBD) appeal from the SCCO (where Robin also acted for the Claimant) concerning a solicitor and client dispute re: whether an oral agreement allowed for additional sums to be payable by the client and whether the solicitor had lawfully terminated the retainer.
- Masters v Charles Fussell & Co LLP [2021] EWHC B1 (Costs): Solicitor and client assessment concerning whether the client was able to have an assessment of bills totalling almost £1m and stretching back 8 years. Consideration of interim statute bills and CFAs, Chamberlain bills and special circumstances.
- Oberholster v Little & Anor [2020] EWHC 2635 (QB): Appeal to High Court (Freedman J) regarding the appropriate costs order to make where one defendant has accepted a part 36 offer but another has rejected it and wished to go to trial.
- Newman v Gordon Dadds LLP [2020] EWHC B23 (Costs): Solicitor and client dispute concerning a solicitor who had failed to provide an adequate estimate of costs.
- Ainsworth v Stewarts Law [2020] EWCA Civ 178: Robin successfully represented the Respondent in the court of appeal in this solicitor and client case concerning whether the judge was right to strike out points of dispute relating to document time that were not properly particularised. Robin also acted for the Respondent in the High Court appeal ([2019] Costs LR 669).
- PME v The Scout Association [2019] EWHC 3421 (QB): Appeal to High Court (Stewart J) concerning the scope of an appeal from an authorised costs officer where a provisional assessment had been undertaken. Robin also acted in the first instance decision, reported at [2019] EWHC B10 (Costs) which also dealt with the jurisdiction of costs officers to undertake provisional assessments.
- Badaei v Woodwards Solicitors [2019] EWHC 1854 (QB): High Court appeal (O’Farrell J) dealing with whether, in a Solicitors Act claim, Part 7 recovery proceedings should be stayed pending resolution of Part 8 proceedings for detailed assessment under s 70 of the Act.
- Herbert v H H Law Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 527: With PJ Kirby KC. Leading judgment on post LASPO success fees, risk assessment and whether ATE premiums are a solicitor’s disbursement.
- Vertannes v United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust [2018] EWHC B18 (Costs): Whether, where a CMO had been made and then a hearing listed for updated budgets to be considered, had the effect that the bill of costs needed to be phased per the approved budget.
- Gill v Heer Manak Solicitors [2018] EWHC 2881 (QB): Mr. Justice Walker. Appeal from Master Simons considering whether a firm had terminated the retainer with their client on reasonable notice.
- Woodland v Swimming Teachers’ Association and Others [2018] 3 Costs LR 469: High Court (QBD). Discontinuance under r.38, Bullock and Sanderson Orders and the appropriate apportionment of costs between multiple defendants.
- Hugh Cartwright & Amin v Devoy-Williams & Anor [2018] EWHC 1692 (QB): Davies J. Appeal from a costs judge’s decisions on hourly rates, counsel’s fees, set off and the costs of assessment.
- Annie Parvez v Mooney Everett Solicitors Ltd [2018] EWHC 62 (QB): Mr. Justice Soole. Appeal in solicitor / client proceedings concerning a client’s right to elect to accept delivery of a bill where there were alleged breaches of the solicitors’ accounts rules.
- Richard Slade & Company Solicitors v Boodia & Anor [2017] EWHC 2699 (QB): Mrs. Justice Slade. Appeal from a costs judge on the question of whether partial bills (containing only profit costs) could stand as interim statute bills. Also consideration of whether such bills could form a ‘Chamberlain’ bill.
- Mitchell v Gilling-Smith [2017] EWHC B18 (Costs): Whether an ATE in a post LASPO Clinical negligence claim was reasonable and proportionate.
- Vivienne Jago v Whitbread Group PLC (2016) Lawtel: Master Whalan SCCO. Acting for the paying party in an application to disallow costs under CPR r.44.11. 50% of the claimant’s assessed costs disallowed due to her solicitor’s improper and unreasonable conduct in the detailed assessment proceedings.
- Rahimian & Anor v Allan Janes LLP [2016] EWHC B18 (Costs): Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker. Solicitor and client assessment. Consideration of ‘Chamberlain’ bills and when the client must be in a position to consider whether to have the bills assessed.
- Vlamaki v Sookias & Sookias [2015] EWHC 3334 (QB): Mr. Justice Walker. Appeal following a solicitor and client assessment. Whether a retainer allowed the solicitors to render interim statute bills.
