header-logo header-logo

Guideline hourly rates: the road ahead (Pt 2)

17 September 2021 / Julian Chamberlayne
Issue: 7948 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs , Profession
printer mail-detail
57449
In his second instalment on the guideline hourly rates report, Julian Chamberlayne tackles regional issues, revised guides & more
  • The final report of the Civil Justice Council working group on guideline hourly rates: responses from paying parties, regional issues, and the revised guide for judges conducting cost assessments.

In the first part of this series, I reported on the decision of the Master of the Rolls to implement the recommendations in the final report of the Civil Justice Council (CJC) working group on guideline hourly rates (GHR). I also summarised key themes from the receiving parties who responded to the interim report and how they may affect the next CJC review, which will take place within two years.

In this second part, I turn to the responses from paying parties, some regional issues, and the revised guide for judges conducting cost assessments.

Paying party responses

The main theme from the paying parties was to suggest that the CJC should have reverted to an expense

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
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
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll