header-logo header-logo

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

Fees fi fo fum

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll