This is an appeal that relates to costs. [1]
All but 2 items on that Bill have now been agreed. The outstanding items are:
a. Item 53 in the sum of £5,400 plus VAT in respect of a medical report from Mr Irons, a consultant in obstetrics and gynaecology and b. Item 58 in the sum of £8,775 plus VAT in respect of a medical report from Dr Khan, a consultant cardiologist. [2]
An invoice for each sum, issued by Premex Services Limited, and addressed to C’s solicitor was served with the bill. Premex is a medical reporting organisation. It is instructed by solicitors to provide medical reports. It maintains a panel of medical experts to whom it offers quick payment terms and other services. In exchange for those favourable payment terms and services, the experts provide reports at a lower cost than they would charge if directly instructed by solicitors. [3]
D’s solicitors asked for a breakdown of items 53 and 58. This was correctly
understood to be a request for an explanation of how much of the claimed fee related to the individual medical report and how much related to the services provided by Premex. The request for a breakdown was rejected by Premex (and so in effect by C’s solicitors)
…the appeal rests on the resolution of a single issue: is a receiving party required to provide a breakdown in its bill between the cost of an expert report and the costs of a medical reporting organisation (“MRO”) approached to provide the report, or is it permissible for the receiving party to submit a bill which simply includes the fee charged by the MRO to provide the medical report? [7]
CPR PD 47 paragraph 5.2:
On commencing detailed assessment proceedings, the receiving party must
serve on the paying party and all the other relevant persons the following
documents —
….
(c) copies of the fee notes of counsel and of any expert in respect of fees
claimed in the bill; [9]
the language of PD 47 is very clear and admits of no doubt. Paragraph 5.2
applies if the receiving party is asking the paying party to pay for the cost of an expert. If that is the case, then the receiving party is required to provide a copy of the expert’s fee note(s). The effect is that the precise cost charged by the expert (recorded in the fee note) is known. [18]
the paying party can make a decision about the fee. In doing so it
may well consider what the “going rate” for a similar report is. Without the fee note the paying party cannot make a rational, evidence based decision, about whether to accept that aspect of the bill, reject it or make a counteroffer. The court is in the same position. [19]
it is clear that PD 47 imposes a duty on the receiving party to provide the
fee note of any expert instructed and, where such costs are claimed details of the costs of any MRO. Premex is not an expert. Its invoice cannot be described in any sensible way as a fee note and is in any event not the fee note of the expert. [22]
medicalnegligencenow.com 