Griffin v Kleyman & Co Solicitors Ltd [2026] EWHC 257 (SCCO)

Detailed Assessment — 2026-02-09

Solicitor/client assessment where the solicitor was awarded costs under the one-fifth rule but penalised 20% for overbilling and negligent record-keeping. Part 36 confirmed to have no application to s.70 Solicitors Act assessments.

Overview

Date: 9 February 2026

Judge: Costs Judge Leonard

Nature of Proceedings: Solicitor and client assessment under s.70 Solicitors Act 1974

Key Issues

Whether a Part 36 offer can displace the "one-fifth rule" in s.70(9)
What constitutes "special circumstances" under s.70(10)
Impact of solicitor overbilling and poor record-keeping on costs
Distinction between Part 8 costs and costs of assessment

The Facts

The Claimant (Clare Griffin) sought an assessment of bills rendered by her former solicitors, the Defendant (Kleyman & Co Solicitors Ltd), between March 2020 and May 2021. The bills totaled £181,954.64 (including VAT and disbursements).

The assessment order was made by consent on 13 May 2022, following a Part 8 application issued by the Claimant in July 2021. The assessment process was lengthy and contentious, involving a preliminary issue on estimates (which the Claimant lost) and detailed points of dispute on the Defendant costs.

The Outcome of the Assessment

Following the detailed assessment:

Bills assessed at: £154,039.94
Total reduction: £27,914.70 (15.34%)
Billing refund due to Claimant: £20,269.88

Crucially, the reduction was less than one-fifth (20%) of the original bills.

The One-Fifth Rule

Under s.70(9) Solicitors Act 1974, the costs of assessment follow the event:

If the bill is reduced by one-fifth or more, the solicitor pays the costs
If the reduction is less than one-fifth, the party chargeable (client) pays the costs

Section 70(10) allows the court to certify "special circumstances" and make a different order.

The Part 36 Offer

On 23 May 2022, the Claimant made what she described as a "Part 36 Offer" to accept £28,000 in full and final settlement. The offer was expressly stated to be intended to have "the consequences of Part 36."

The Central Legal Issue: Can Part 36 Displace the One-Fifth Rule?

Costs Judge Leonard confirmed his previous decision in Zuhri v Vardags Ltd [2023] EWHC 3050 (SCCO):

CPR Part 36 has no application to an assessment under section 70 of the 1974 Act. The costs provisions of CPR Part 36 (secondary legislation) are inconsistent with the costs provisions of s.70(9) and (10) (primary legislation).Following Angel Airlines SA v Dean & Dean [2008], the Judge accepted that a clear without prejudice offer can be a special circumstance. However, he found the Claimant offer was not in proper form because it sought to use Part 36 consequences to defeat the one-fifth rule.

The Penalty for Overbilling and Poor Record-Keeping

The Defendant had incorrectly included disbursements of £4,334.10 in its bills. The Judge found this overbilling arose from negligence.

The Defendant also failed to produce a cash account for over 3 years despite court orders. The Judge was critical: "That is not acceptable. It does not reflect well upon the Defendant record keeping."

As a result, the Defendant was awarded only 80% of its costs of the assessment — a 20% penalty for its conduct.

Key Takeaways

Part 36 does not apply to s.70 assessments — Don not waste costs making Part 36 offers in solicitor/client assessments.
Without prejudice offers can work — But they must be genuinely advantageous to the offeree and not dressed up as Part 36.
Overbilling will cost you — The 20% reduction in costs recovery demonstrates that poor billing practices have real financial consequences.
Maintain proper records — Failure to produce accounts reflects badly and will be penalised.

Conclusion

Griffin v Kleyman reinforces the distinct statutory regime governing solicitor/client assessments. Practitioners cannot simply transplant CPR Part 36 into these proceedings. The decision also serves as a warning that the court will penalise poor billing practices and inadequate record-keeping, even where the solicitor technically succeeds on the one-fifth rule.

Citation: Griffin v Kleyman & Co Solicitors Ltd [2026] EWHC 257 (SCCO)

Full judgment on BAILII

Related Specialist Support

Costs Budgeting and Detailed Assessment: Precedent H, dispute documents, negotiations and assessment strategy.
Bills of Costs: Clear, defensible traditional and electronic bills prepared for recovery.
Law Firm Costs Support: Flexible specialist capacity for litigation teams and solicitors.