Matthew Waszak

“Matthew Waszak is absolutely phenomenal. He knows his stuff and is one of the nicest people ever.” – Chambers & Partners

“Utterly brilliant. Matthew knows costs inside-out and gives clear, practical and strategically savvy advice.’  – Legal 500

“Matthew Waszak is a very persuasive advocate. He fights hard for his clients, is well prepared and makes succinct points.” – Legal 500

Matt emerged as a leading costs junior during the disputes which followed the implementation of the changes under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. His early cases included, in relation to challenges to ATE premiums, acting for the successful claimant in Mitchell v Gilling-Smith [2017] EWHC B18 (Costs) and for the successful appellant in Pollard v University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust [2017] 1 Costs 45, cited with approval and central to the Court of Appeal’s decision in West v Stockport [2019] 1 WLR 6157.

He has a very busy between the parties’ costs practice, typically acting for major solicitors’ firms and defendant insurers.“[A] very persuasive advocate…[who] fights hard for his clients”, Matt appears very regularly in Court, and is at the cutting edge of the latest arguments and developments. However, always alive to his clients’ commercial interests, he is also instructed in mediations, both for his focused presentation of arguments and his deft people skills.

Matt is highly numerate and known for his expertise in the use of the electronic bill. He was instructed as junior Counsel before the Court of Appeal in the important case of AKC v Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust [2022] Costs LR 1095¸ which concerned the CPR requirements for bills of costs. He prides himself on recognising the importance not only of points of principle and technical points, but on his clients’ requirement for granular analysis. He is known for rolling his sleeves up, working as a team player and for his meticulous preparation and eye for detail.

Having initially developed his costs practice alongside broader common law work, Matt is immersed in the litigation which has flown from the implementation of FRC, as well as disputes in respect of QOCS, Part 36 and costs budgeting.

He appeared for the successful defendant in the important case of Nema v Kirkland [2019] EWHC B15 (Costs), which concerned the appropriate mechanism for determining disputed disbursements in cases subject to FRC in CPR Part 45, Section IIIA, and which was subsequently endorsed by the Court of Appeal in Doyle v M&D Foundations and Building Services Ltd [2022] 4 WLR 93. He is uniquely well placed in respect of disputes arising from the recent extension of fixed recoverable costs (FRC).

In a broader context, Matt is regularly brought into major litigation, including commercial litigation and group litigation, for specialist advice or advocacy on a range of costs points. He is instructed as a costs specialist in respect of costs budgeting and costs budget variations, the application of Part 36, applications for security for costs and in applications for wasted costs orders and non-party costs orders. Matt is regularly instructed in appeals of first instance decisions.

Examples of his recent work include:

• Acting for the receiving party in a commercial arbitration seated in London in respect of a bill of costs of c. £1.5m.
• Acting for the defendant in relation to costs in a substantial industrial disease group claim.
• R v Luckhurst [2022] 1 WLR 3818: acted for the paying party in the detailed assessment of costs in the Supreme Court, involving consideration of the status of the guideline fees under Supreme Court Practice Direction 13.
• Advising on the scope of a contractual indemnity for costs in a policy of professional indemnity insurance.
• Acting for the receiving party in the assessment of costs payable pursuant to a contractual indemnity.
• Acting for a legal expenses insurer in respect of a non-party costs order sought in substantial group litigation.
• Acting in an appeal in respect of the dismissal of a non-party costs order.
• Instructed on an appeal (High Court, Kings Bench Division), subsequently compromised, in relation to a Costs Judge’s strike out/dismissal of unparticularised points of dispute in relation to the electronic bill of costs.
• Carson v Mersey Care NHS Foundation Trust: acted for the successful claimant in a test case in the District Registry of the High Court in Manchester: a claim started under the EL/PL Protocol where the claimant subsequently loses capacity and becomes a protected party is not subject to FRC under CPR Part 45, section IIIA.
• Instructed by the paying party in respect of a successful application to set aside a default costs certificate relating to costs of c. £2.5m.
• Lacoste v Marks and Spencer (High Court, Chancery Division): acted for the defendant in respect of costs budgeting in a trademark infringement claim in the Chancery Division of the High Court.
• Acted for the claimant in a dispute in the High Court concerning the liability for costs of work done to establish the reasonable security of a periodical payments order after the acceptance of a Part 36 offer in a catastrophic injury case.
• Instructed in numerous cases involving the construction and application of the fixed recoverable costs rules under section IIIA of CPR Part 45.
• Acting for a defendant insurer in numerous cases involving the definition of clinical negligence cases and the scope of the MOJ Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury (Employers’ Liability and Public Liability Claims).
• Instructed to advise on and draft written submissions on the principle of costs in a commercial case following a five-day trial.
• Acted for the claimant in an appeal (subsequently compromised) of a costs management order where the costs budgeting judge allowed nothing for budgeted costs, on account of the level of costs incurred by the claimant.
• Acting for a respondent in the Employment Tribunal in respect of an application for a costs order sought under the Employment Tribunals Rules 2013.