--(1) The court may not make an order for budgeted costs unless-
----(a) the lay party seeking the order is present, unless for some exceptional reasons this is impracticable, when the application is made;
----(b) the court satisfies itself that each party fully understands the consequences of the order that is being sought as to-
--------(i) the lay party's liability for costs to his own attorney-at-law whether he obtains an order for costs against any other party or not;
--------(ii) his liability to pay costs in the budgeted sum to the other party if that party obtains an order for costs against him; and
--------(iii) what his liability might be under paragraphs (i) and (ii) if rule 67.5 applied;
----(c) there has been filed a document recording the express consent of the lay party to the application and to any order made as a consequence of the application; and
----(d) such consent is in a separate document which-
--------(i) is signed by the lay party ;
--------(ii) deals only with the question of budgeted costs;
--------(iii) states the attorney's-at-law estimate of what the prescribed costs appropriate to the proceedings would be;
----(iv) gives an estimate of the total costs of the proceedings as between attorney-at-law and client; and
----(v) sets out the basis of that estimate including the amount of any hourly charge.
--(2) The written consent of the client must not be disclosed to the other party.
--(3) This rule also applies to any other lay party who consents to or does not oppose an order for a costs budget.
Notes
Amended by Legal Notice 140 of 2000.
Back to Rule (67. Costs - Quantification)