header-logo header-logo

Fees fi fo fum

26 July 2016 / David Wright
Categories: Features , Costs , Budgeting
printer mail-detail

David Wright discusses fixed advocacy fees

Is the trial advocacy fee payable where no court advocacy has actually taken place?

The question of when a trial starts, as a trigger for an additional costs payment, has been an issue for some time, coming to the fore under the pre-LASPO success fee regime where a higher success fee was payable where a case concluded at trial. The problem arises when the case settles at the doors of the court and under the old r 45.16, such case law as there was indicated that if the trial had not actually begun, then the higher success fee could not be claimed.

The post-LASPO equivalent of this is part IIIA of CPR 45, and table 6B within r 45.29C, where a higher fee is payable if the claim is disposed of at trial. Under section C of table 6B, it is made up of three parts: £2,655, 20% of the damages and the relevant trial advocacy fee.

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—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll