As many civil practitioners will be aware, since 01 October 2023 where a case that is subject to the fixed recoverable cost regime under CPR45 concludes either because it settles, discontinues or is disposed of at trial, the relevant fixed costs in practice direction 45 will apply (e.g. those listed in Table 12 for fast-track trials).  But what are the fixed costs if a claim is struck out or there is summary judgment? 

This was the question posed to District Judge Filed in the case of Mil Collections Limited v My Shop 4 Ltd and others [2025] EWCC 38.  The background to the dispute can be found in paragraphs [5] to [10], the essence of which E.on Next Energy Limited assigned its debts to the claimant (who was in the business of purchasing and recovering debts).  The claimant issued multiple debt claims against individual defendants.  However, many of the defendants denied being customers of Eon and raised issue with the ‘scant detail’ in the particulars of claim. 

13 of the claims were consolidated [13] with a value of £335,000.00 and the claimant was ordered to provided amended particulars of claim or the claim would be struck out.  The consolidated claims were allocated to the fast-track band 1. 

The claimant did provide amended particulars of claim but the court formed a preliminary view the pleading was deficient and listed the matter for a preliminary hearing to determine if the claim was struck out or should be struck out [17-19].  At the hearing, the claimant accepted there was a breach of the unless order and the claims stood struck out, an application for relief from sanction was dismissed. 

The question the court then had to answer is what fixed costs (if any) were applicable.  The claimant’s position was that Table 12 of practice direction 45 does not apply in the circumstances of this case because there was ‘no settlement, discontinuance or disposal at trial’ [35].  The defendant argued that reference to settlement and discontinuance is a non-exhaustive list of circumstances in which a claim may conclude [36]. 

It states that it would be an “absurdity” if a party whose case is struck out would escape liability for costs which would have flowed from, for instance, a discontinuance

District Judge Filed concluded [40]:

I do not accept the Claimant’s submission that Table 12(B) contains an exhaustive list of the circumstances in which it applies. The extension of fixed recoverable costs to the Fast Track was a significant and ambitious change to the way in which costs are dealt with in Fast Track cases. There is a broad and varied range of claims which may proceed in the Fast Track, including simple debt claims, boundary disputes, personal injury claims, professional negligence claims and building disputes. Whilst those drafting the rules have clearly gone to extensive efforts to ensure that the fixed costs rules and Practice Direction address most circumstances and permutations, it cannot have been expected or intended that they would expressly deal with every possible circumstance which might arise in such a wide range of cases. The rules must be construed widely and purposefully

And [42]

Adopting a wide and purposive construction of Table 12, I consider that the words “settles or discontinues” in 12B should be read to mean any means by which the case might conclude after the issue of proceedings but before trial, including strike out (whether automatic, of the court’s own motion, or following an application by a party)

In the premises, if a case is struck out or subject to summary judgment, the relevant fixed costs (at the relevant staging post) in practice direction 45 apply.