To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
1 thought on “Nicholas Bacon QC”
Do we have to have this awful cliche "specialist costs counsel"? Do people talk about "specialist commercial counsel" or "specialist judicial revivew counsel"? Messrs Morgan & Bacon are barristers like any other, whose practice happens to include a field which is about 47.5% ordinary contract, 47.5% knowledge of civil procedure(ie interpretation of the CPR, which needs to be mastered in almost every area of civil practice), and perhaps at most 5% knowledge of principles special to costs. Why is an argument about whether a CFA is enforceable different from an argument about whether a consumer credit agreement is enforceable, which almost every barrister in general civil practice has experience of? The answer is that it isn't! I have nothing against Messrs Bacon, Morgan and others – indeed, Mr Morgan in particular is a brilliant lawyer and the real tragedy is that he is pigeonholed as "costs counsel". But I would honestly say that in 80% plus of cases where "costs counsel" are instructed, often on hourly rates more usually seen from leading commercial or tax counsel, the solicitor would have been at least as well off sticking with counsel in the underlying case, who would be well able to deal with the issues, would be cheaper per se, and who would not even need to read in!