In the context of costs litigation, CPR 47.13 is a procedural rule that governs how a paying party must respond to a bill of costs by serving points of dispute. For solicitors and costs lawyers managing complex litigation, a clear understanding of this rule is essential to protect clients’ interests and ensure that only reasonable and proportionate costs are received.

This article examines the function of CPR 47.13 within the context of the detailed assessment process, highlighting its practical implications for parties involved in costs litigation. It also considers related procedural requirements and strategic considerations that solicitors and costs lawyers should take into account when managing this stage of proceedings.

What is CPR 47.13?

CPR 47.13 of the Civil Procedure Rules requires the paying party to serve points of dispute within 21 days after the notice of commencement of detailed assessment proceedings. These points are intended to challenge the receiving party’s bill of costs, item by item, where appropriate, and form the basis for discussion, negotiation, or ultimately, adjudication at a detailed assessment hearing.

The rule ensures that disputes over costs are clearly articulated in writing, enabling both sides and the court to efficiently identify specific points, stating concisely the objections made.

The Purpose of Points of Dispute

The primary function of points of dispute is to allow the paying party to challenge the reasonableness or proportionality of the time spent, the hourly rates claimed, or any particular item in the bill. Importantly, CPR 47.13(1) requires that each point must state concisely the nature of the objection, avoiding unnecessary length or ambiguity.

For example, if a paying party considers that the time claimed for reviewing disclosure is excessive, they must identify any general points (such as proportionality) and specific points stating concisely why that item is disputed.

Consequences of Failing to Comply

If no points of dispute are served within the prescribed 21-day timeframe, the receiving party may apply for a default costs certificate under CPR 47.9. This certificate allows the full amount claimed in the bill of costs to be summarily assessed and enforced without the need for a hearing, often to the significant disadvantage of the paying party.

For solicitors acting for defendants or other paying parties, it is therefore vital to commence detailed assessment proceedings promptly and ensure compliance with CPR 47.13 to avoid an adjustment in favour of the paying party being missed altogether.

Drafting Points of Dispute and Replies

Effective drafting of the points of dispute and replies is a core skill for any costs professional. The quality and clarity of these documents can determine whether a claim is settled early or proceeds to a full, detailed assessment hearing.

When preparing points of dispute, it is essential to:

• Cross-reference each item with the costs precedents annexed to the bill;
• Challenge vague or excessive time entries;
• Raise any general points about proportionality or conduct;
• Clearly identify specific points stating why a particular cost should be reduced or disallowed.

Equally, replies by the receiving party must focus on defending costs claimed and reinforcing the necessity and reasonableness of each item.

Negotiation and Settlement Opportunities

Once points of dispute have been served, there is often a window for negotiation. An offer to the points of dispute and replies can form the basis of Part 36 or Calderbank offer, encouraging early resolution and avoiding the time and cost of a hearing.

In both the County Court and the High Court, costs judges value clarity and cooperation. Well-drafted submissions that fairly acknowledge what is and isn’t reasonable are more likely to receive a favourable response, whether in negotiations or at a hearing.

Application of CPR 47.13 Within the Costs Assessment Framework

In professional practice, CPR 47.13 serves a procedural function that defines and limits the scope of dispute within the detailed assessment process. The formulation of points of dispute under this rule is not merely a formality; it determines which issues are placed before the court and which fall outside the ambit of the assessment unless permission is sought.

Accordingly, objections should be raised with precision and supported by clear reasoning. Challenges should focus on substantive issues such as excessive time claimed, duplication of work, or inadequate justification for disbursements. Routine or indiscriminate challenges are rarely persuasive and can undermine the credibility of the paying party’s position before the court.

The court, whether in the County Court or High Court, will expect both parties to have engaged constructively with the bill, identifying areas of legitimate concern rather than adopting an adversarial posture. Where points of dispute are carefully drafted and focused on material issues, they assist the court in fulfilling its duty to assess the costs justly and proportionately.

Professional Considerations When Responding to a Bill of Costs

When acting on behalf of the paying party, it is essential to engage with the bill promptly upon receipt of the notice of commencement, with a view to serving compliant and well-reasoned points of dispute within the 21-day period set out under CPR 47.13.

The duty to identify any general points as well as specific points, stating concisely the nature of each objection, requires careful attention to both form and content. Excessive generalisation or use of standardised templates without proper scrutiny of the item in the bill may be criticised by the court or disregarded entirely.

Equally, for the receiving party, the preparation of replies must address each point with appropriate reference to authority, precedent, or supporting material, including the costs precedents annexed to the bill where relevant. The exchange of points of dispute and replies should assist in clarifying areas of agreement and narrowing those that remain contested ahead of any detailed assessment hearing.

Both parties should be mindful of the court’s expectation that efforts will be made to resolve disputes without the need for a hearing, where possible. A properly reasoned offer to the points of dispute and replies, made in a timely manner, may not only encourage settlement but also protect a party’s position on costs.

Contact Greener Costs

At Greener Costs, we specialise in all aspects of costs litigation, from drafting the points of dispute and replies to representation at detailed assessment hearings. Our experienced team of cost draftsmen and lawyers assist solicitors and law firms across England and Wales in securing the best possible outcomes for their clients, without an impact on the environment.

Need expert help in navigating CPR 47.13 or managing complex, detailed assessment proceedings? We’re here to help. Contact us today on  01204 263047 or email info@greenercosts.co.uk to speak with one of our specialists and take the first step toward resolving your costs dispute efficiently and effectively.