A recent wasted costs order against Tilly Bailey & Irvine (TBI)—a North‑East-based firm—has reinforced courts’ expectations around early liability verification and professional conduct.

TBI continued personal injury proceedings against multiple defendants even after evidence emerged that some were not the correct parties. The court, finding their actions unreasonable, imposed a wasted costs order against the firm, according to Legal Futures.

In the case:

• The solicitor issued claims without confirming defendant identity.
• Despite clear defence responses disputing liability, the firm continued with the litigation.
• Master Thornett ruled that privilege could not shield misconduct where proper inquiry was neglected, and the firm was ordered to pay wasted costs

This case makes clear that courts are not tolerant of litigation pursued on weak grounds, especially where procedural safeguards are ignored.

What This Means for Solicitors & Case Handlers

The ruling demonstrates that early, robust case verification is essential before issuing proceedings. Relying solely on client instruction is not acceptable.

• Procedural compliance and proportionality matter—courts expect practitioners to view litigation through the lens of reasonableness and cost efficiency.
• Wasted costs orders remain rare but are increasingly invoked where litigation is pursued unreasonably or without solid evidential basis.

Risk Management: Five Essential Controls

To minimise exposure to sanctions, legal teams should implement and monitor the following:

Wasted Costs Risk Reduction – 5 Key Controls

1. Verify liability before issuing proceedings
   Confirm party identity and gather incident reports before filing.
2. Document decision rationale
   Maintain internal evidence that records why litigation proceeded, especially if liability was uncertain.
3. Train case handlers on compliance
   Regular training ensures awareness of CPR rules, litigation ethics, and sanction risks.
4. Audit active litigation files
   Regular audits help catch procedural risks before they escalate.
5. Insist on fully compliant expert reports
   Avoid speculative or poorly constructed medico-legal reporting—ensure credibility from the outset.

This judgment shows that solicitors must act with procedural care and evidential integrity or face financial and reputational consequences. With declining claim volumes and cost reforms reshaping the PI sector, firms that maintain rigour in case preparation will continue to operate effectively. Those that cut corners risk incurring sanctions—and damaging client trust.

UKExpertMedical works with law firms to support robust, defensible litigation through high-quality medico-legal reporting. Our expert-led service helps legal teams meet evidential standards, minimise procedural risk, and deliver compliant, court-ready reports.

Instruct Us