header-logo header-logo

Costs disputes on the rise

11 June 2013
Issue: 7564 / Categories: Legal News , Costs
printer mail-detail

A poll of costs lawyers has revealed increasingly negative predictions for the post-Jackson era.
 

More costs lawyers than ever before (80%) predict a rise in disputes between solicitors and their clients as a result of the changes to conditional fee agreements, up from 69% last year, the second annual survey of the Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL) has revealed. More than 70% thought the reforms will discourage solicitors from taking on less straightforward cases (54% last year).

However, the majority of costs lawyers were optimistic about their own future and a quarter said they expect to hire more staff.

Common mistakes made by solicitors when dealing with costs were failing to keep thorough records, thinking they could do it themselves, turning to costs lawyers only when things go wrong, and using unqualified costs draftsmen.

 

Issue: 7564 / Categories: Legal News , Costs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll