header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Costs compliance

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
30 September 2020 / David Cooper
Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail
28954
In the light of a recent decision highlighting the difficulties of costs charging, David Cooper stresses the need for vigilance

In brief

  • Adam Newman v Gordon Dadds LLP:
  • the need for solicitors to be vigilant in relation to compliance with the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors;
  • useful guidance as to what should be addressed when deciding, whether acting for solicitors or the client, how to prepare and present the case to the costs judge for determination.

As a result of the new SRA Standards and Regulations issued in November 2019 (https://bit.ly/35kWGZN), which replaced the SRA Handbook, solicitors are required to comply with para 8.7 of The Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFL and para 7.1(c) of the SRA Code of Conduct for Firms. In addition, there is a requirement to comply with the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 (2013/3134) which stipulates that solicitors must provide the information about the overall cost of the services and if there are likely to be any disbursements.

Notwithstanding

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

Read All
Sponsored by
CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Motor finance faces £11bn reckoning
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
NLJ this week: Gold on Awaab’s Law & digital divorce
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
NLJ this week: AI in the dock—courts need literacy, not fear
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Landlords lose their upward climb
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
NLJ this week: Privy Council undresses the ‘shareholder rule’
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll