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.
5 thoughts on “Costs budgeting”
Any firm of Costs Lawyers who places their future viability on Costs Budgeting will be beating a fast track to an Insolvency Practioner ! It is hard enough to get paid for work that you do now at the end of a case when it has been concluded never mind trying to recover fees for work done in the middle of one. Methinks that Solicitors are much more likely to do this work themselves unless they can get their Costs Lawyer to do it on a “I will pay you on a if/when I get paid basis ” If this is the only work available post Jackson (which it wont be ) be very afraid.
Wow, the merchants of doom are in full voice again, I see!
Given costs management (and the courts failure to use their powers to date) is a “hot topic” now, then any draftsmans work done, will be recompensable.
As to the suggestion this is not work for draftsmen; to be frank (instead of Anonymous!) any draftsman whom cannot costs budget a case realistically and better than a solicitor, doesnt deserve to be doing the job in the first place.
I take Ian’s point about payment, but which of us doesnt let their fees and work ride with a case these days until payment anyway in most cases?
Costs management is not the “way forward”, but simply another diversity for sensible draftsmen to be actively involved in – particularly if they wish to live up the ACL billing as a serious part of the profession in its own right.
Ian has to be right. Hope everyone runs a mile from this.
Ian has a valid point but Anon’s comments are not beyond the realms of ‘feesability’…
lets not forget that an awful lot of CD are in-house these days. Surely they will be actively involved in this task?
not everyone is external