header-logo header-logo

Costs may cause chaos

15 November 2012
Issue: 7538 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Call for lawyers to get a handle on litigation funding

Lawyers risk losing thousands of pounds in fees and legal costs unless they get a handle on litigation funding, costs lawyers and barristers have warned.

A panel of experts recently reviewed the costs-management pilots in the mercantile courts and technology and construction courts at The Future of Costs Seminar, co-hosted by 3PB Barristers and Cost Advocates (CA). The pilots require lawyers from both sides to provide a detailed estimate of incurred and future costs in the litigation via a nine-page Precedent HB form.

The panel estimated that lawyers in the pilots are spending an average of 2.5 hours filling out a Precedent HB form, and warned that getting budgets wrong could be disastrous.

They highlighted the case of Henry v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2012] EWHC 90218 (Costs), where the budget for disclosure and witness statements was approved at £23,737. The final amount claimed in the bill of costs was £316,447, resulting in a loss in costs of £292,710.

Jon Lord, principal costs lawyer at CA, said: “The Precedent HB form looks straightforward enough but the thought process behind it is a lot more complicated. Lawyers are required to provide the breakdown for pre-action costs, disclosure, witness statements, expert reports, fee earners’ time, counsel’s fees, contingents and other disbursements. Trying to calculate these is a very complex procedure.”

Emilie Woolley, senior costs solicitor at CA, said: “Law firms need to be prepared for the shift from exchanging broad estimates of costs already incurred to prospective budgeting. Lawyers need to be prepared for the strategic and tactical deviousness that may become apparent, and be ready to scrutinise their opponent’s budgets without divulging their own secrets.”

However, costs budgets could lead to greater certainty and transparency if lawyers prepare ahead of the reform, she said.

Graeme Sampson, barrister at 3PB, warned firms that failure to follow costs-management procedure could result in adverse costs orders.

Issue: 7538 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
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
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll