Legal Cost Specialists
I regret to have to announce the closure of the Supreme Court Costs Office (SCCO). Actually, I’m exaggerating somewhat. With the creation of the new Supreme Court, the SCCO has been renamed the Senior Courts Costs Office. The updated CPR uses the shorter term "Costs Office". The original name made it sound like a chicken […]
Closure of the Supreme Court Costs Office Read More »
Contrary to all logic and common sense, the Legal Costs Blog appears to have acquired a not insignificant readership. The Solicitors Journal, aimed not just at solicitors but lawyers generally, claims that its website attracts over 34,000 users a month. Insurance Times, aimed at the whole insurance industry, claims over 45,000 users per month. Both
The Legal Costs Blog – Who reads this rubbish? Read More »
The old Practice Direction – Protocols (PDP), at paragraph 4, stated: “A.1 Where a person enters into a funding arrangement within the meaning of rule 43.2(1)(k) he should inform other potential parties to the claim that he has done so. A.2 Paragraph 4A.1 applies to all proceedings whether proceedings to which a
Notification of funding – The Old Rules Read More »
Whilst opening a recent copy of New Law Journal, a complimentary copy of Butterworths Civil Costs Newsletter fluttered out. Now, there’s obviously no such thing as too much legal costs information and so another publication devoted to the subject can be no bad thing. However, on the back of the newsletter was a form to
Civil Costs Newsletter Read More »
Most Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA) challenges follow a well-trodden path. However, occasionally a new variation arises where there is no authority directly on all fours. This happened in the recent case of Smith v Carpetright plc, heard by Regional Cost Judge Sparrow in Norwich County Court. The Claimant had entered into a CFA with Godfrey
Successful Conditional Fee Agreement challenge Read More »
The Ministry of Justice has just announced that claimant and defendant representatives have “reached broad agreement on the detail” of the new Claims Process for RTA personal injury claims with a value of between £1,000 and £10,000. The Civil Justice Council has mediated an agreement on the fixed recoverable costs which will depend on which
New Claims Process fixed fee agreement Read More »
It seems that it’s not just defendant insurance companies that are unhappy about the legal costs that some lawyers charge, as this video shows: (If you receive the Legal Costs Blog via email you made need to adjust your security settings to view the video.)
Free legal advice too expensive Read More »
The Gazette (click link) reports that the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has walked out of talks on extending fixed costs in personal injury cases. This mediation was put together at the request of Lord Justice Jackson as part of his Costs Review. It seems inevitable that his final report will include a recommendation
Jackson Costs Review facing first hurdle Read More »
The Claims for you (a trading name of Wixted & Co solicitors) website claims that they succeed in 98% of their accident claims. If true, this is an impressive success rate. However it does raise a number of issues: 1. Is this success rate not a reflection of the quality of the lawyers who work
Impressive CFA success rate? Read More »
Lord Justice Jackson’s Preliminary Report on Civil Litigation Costs focuses on the perceived problems that have arisen in recent years in relation to legal costs: “There is no doubt that litigation over costs has increased dramatically in recent years, and that this growth is one of the driving factors behind the present review. Whilst many
Jackson Costs Review – Part 7 – A shrinking role for costs draftsmen? Read More »