News & Resources

Successful appeal of reduction to block-rated ATE premium involving the issue of comparator premium evidence

15th April 2019

Matt Waszak (instructed by Kellie Barnes from A&M Bacon Ltd) acted for the successful Appellant in an appeal of a reduction to a pre-LASPO block-rated ATE premium made at detailed assessment.  Judgment in Kelly v Bellway Plc, handed down by His Honour Judge Gosnell DCJ in the County Court at Leeds on 12.04.19, can be accessed here.

At detailed assessment, District Judge Shepherd reduced a block-rated ATE premium (which had been taken out to fund a personal injury claim arising from a tripping accident) from £20,698.83 (including Insurance Premium Tax) to £2,115.00 (also including Insurance Premium Tax). In doing so, she relied on evidence of ‘comparator’ ATE premiums and a 2011 Research Report from the University of Lincoln, titled Excessive and Disproportionate Costs in Litigation, exhibited to a witness statement provided by the Defendant. At detailed assessment, District Judge Shepherd found that:

·         The Claimant had failed to show she acted reasonably in the selection of the ATE policy.

·         She was not satisfied that the Claimant had done all that was reasonably required in the selection of the policy.

·         It was appropriate to reduce the ATE premium because appropriate steps were not taken at the inception of the ATE policy.

·         The District Judge could rely on the evidence of ‘comparator’ premiums exhibited to the witness statement provided by the Defendant.

In a judgment which contains a lengthy exegesis of the law on ATE premium recovery, His Honour Judge Gosnell DCJ allowed the appeal. In doing so, he held that:

·         The District Judge fell into error in her consideration of the adequacy of the Defendant’s evidence [44] and in finding that it was reasonable to place reliance on the comparator evidence provided [49].

·         The comparator premiums provided by the Defendant “were not truly comparable” [51].

·         Three of the comparators the Defendant sought to rely upon were policies with a single premium, which,  relying on paragraph 111 of Brooke LJ’s judgment in Rogers v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2006] EWCA Civ 1134, did not bear legitimate comparison to the three-staged premium in this case [49].

·         In relation to the remaining comparator, HHJ Gosnell DCJ found at [50] that: “This leaves only one comparable policy which may be relevant…..[described as] a staged public liability personal injury policy with a premium of £2,115 if the claim concludes post proceedings on the fast track and £4,335 on the multi track.  I have to say that the redacted policy schedule only describes the accident type as “other” and does not make clear what happens if a fast track claim goes to trial. No details are given about the facts of the claim which the policy covered nor what is covered or the limits of indemnity. The main problem with this type of evidence is that there is no evidence that the policy in question could have been offered to and accepted by the Appellant. For commercial reasons some ATE insurers only offer policies to solicitors on their panel who are bound by certain service standards, including the need to place all business with that insurer (as the solicitor in Rogers was obliged to do). Insurers may also refuse to write business in relation to particular types of claims. The fact that a claimant has secured ATE insurance for their own claim against the Respondent’s insurers in this case is not evidence that the Appellant in this case could have secured the same insurance on the same terms” (emphasis added).

·         A careful assessment of the methodology used by the ATE insurer would have shown that the premium was reasonable, at least reasonable by the standards set out in Rogers [51].

Related Barristers

Matthew Waszak

Matthew Waszak
Year of Call: 2012

Close X

Coronavirus Update

TGC continues proactively to safeguard against the risks posed by the spread of Coronavirus. We have a Covid-19 Committee who continue to monitor the situation and follow advice issued by the Government and Public Health England. We will be updating this page as and when new information becomes available. As of 6 July 2020, our London premises, 1 Harcourt Buildings, will be operating with a reduced clerking team in attendance. The remaining staff members and barristers will continue working remotely. We wish to reassure everyone that our contingency plans enable us to continue to provide our services.

Telephoning us

When calling our switchboard number, it will be diverted to a member of the clerking team who will be able to assist in the usual way. All direct dials in Chambers are diverted to be answered remotely.

Emailing us & Sending Instructions

Please send all instructions via email directly to We would be grateful if this could be sent in an orderly fashion to enable working from a screen manageable. We are able to receive hard copy instructions via DX or Post, if necessary. However, we have a preference for electronic documents wherever possible.

Please continue to communicate with barristers directly via phone or email.

Conferences, Joint Settlement Meetings & Mediations

Conferences, meetings and mediations will take place remotely, either by telephone or video until further notice. Group Telephone calls and video calls can be easily arranged. If an in-person meeting is felt necessary please see our Covid-19 Information page for full criteria.

Court Hearings

We are following the Government’s advice closely, which is changing daily. In keeping with that advice, we will continue to service hearings remotely, where possible and as instructed by the hosting Court. In-Person hearings will be accommodated by members of TGC. We will continue to monitor this situation.

Making a payment

If you do not already pay us by BACS, going forward please make arrangements to do so. Please contact the clerks who can supply you with the relevant BACS details.

If you wish to discuss our policy and procedure relating to coronavirus, please do not hesitate to contact our senior clerk Dean Norton on 07535 753098 or

To learn more visit our Covid-19 Information page.