The defendant costs specialists

Posts made in September, 2013

Costs Department pay cut

By on Sep 30, 2013 | 5 comments

RollOnFriday has reported rumours that at Shakespeares solicitors: “Some staff in the costs department have seen their pay drop by nearly £10,000.” The shape of things to come?

Read More

Guideline hourly rates

By on Sep 27, 2013 | 17 comments

I recently came across the following on another costs related blog (note the capitalisation): “The Guideline Hourly Rates ARE DESIGNED FOR FAST TRACK CASES.” Poppycock. The 2010 Guideline Rates for Grade A fee earners in the City is £409 per hour. A bottle of champagne to the first reader who can send me a transcript of a judgment, where the rates have been challenged, allowing a rate of £409 for a fast track matter. They are guideline rates for judges carrying out summary assessment. That might include interim applications in complex multi track commercial disputes or summary assessments of the costs of an appeal in the Court of Appeal. The confusion appears to come from the fact that because it is intended that a summary assessment would be undertaken at the end of a fast track trial that this is the full extent of the role of the guideline hourly rates. See: How the rates were...

Read More

Provisional assessment limit

By on Sep 25, 2013 | 2 comments

I note the commentary to the White Book’s 2013 Cumulative First Supplement states, in relation to provisional assessment: “The Civil Procedure Rule Committee decided that as from April 1, 2013 the rules should apply in England and Wales and that the monetary limit should be £75,000. There are two potential problems with this. One is that during the pilot scheme the number of bills lodged for assessment increased by 50 per cent because parties realised that they were able to test the water with a provisional assessment without running the risk of having to pay the costs of a detailed assessment hearing. … The second potential problem is the increase in the monetary limit which will catch far more bills than previously and if this leads to an increase in the number of bills lodged, as in the pilot scheme, it is likely to cause difficulties with workflow and the administrative work necessary to deal with the incoming papers. The Rule Committee has agreed to review these rules in due course.” Who could have guessed this might cause a...

Read More