header-logo header-logo

26 March 2021 / John Brown
Issue: 7926 / Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

An increase in GHR: now is not the time

43905
John Brown highlights some shortcomings in the Guideline Hourly Rates Review

In January 2021, the Civil Justice Council (CJC) published its consultation on Guideline Hourly Rates (GHR). The raison d’etre for GHR is to give the inexperienced judge a benchmark for assessing the reasonableness of hourly rates claimed by lawyers in civil and commercial claims, without the GHR being a substitute for the proper exercise of judicial discretion.

As lawyers calculate their fees by applying hourly rates to time claimed, the GHR heavily influence the amount of legal costs recoverable by law firms in England and Wales in successful claims brought against the NHS, local and central government (ie, ultimately the taxpayer), insurers, compensators, and private litigants.

For instance, the proposed new GHR would increase the NHS’s annual spend on legal costs by tens of millions of pounds; over a ten-year period, NHS spend would increase by hundreds of millions of pounds.

Last but not least, there is a new elephant in the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll