header-logo header-logo

An increase in GHR: now is not the time

26 March 2021 / John Brown
Issue: 7926 / Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail
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 room–consumer protection. Post

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll