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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll