header-logo header-logo

Justification is everything

31 October 2025 / Sophie Houghton
Issue: 8137 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Dispute resolution , Costs , Fees
printer mail-detail
234234
If you’re exceeding guideline hourly rates, vague assertions won’t cut it, writes Sophie Houghton
  • Courts use guideline hourly rates (GHR) as a starting point; exceeding them requires strong justification.
  • Vague claims of complexity or scale aren’t enough—clear evidence is needed to support higher rates.
  • Case law shows that without compelling reasons, courts won’t allow rates that are significantly above GHR.

When it comes to the question of costs, a longstanding bone of contention between the parties is the hourly rate which is being claimed by the receiving party for the work they have carried out.

Solicitors can technically charge their clients any hourly rate they choose for their services, as long as this is provided for in the retainer with their client. However, if the client seeks to recover those costs from another party, through a costs assessment, such costs will not be recoverable unless they are reasonable and proportionate.

From a practical perspective, when considering what hourly rates will be recoverable, you should be aware that

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

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Head of corporate promoted to director

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Firm strengthens international arbitration team with key London hire

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

FCA contentious financial regulation lawyer joins the team as of counsel

NEWS
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ
The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024—once heralded as a breakthrough—has instead plunged leaseholders into confusion, warns Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke in this week’s NLJ
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now confirmed that offering a disabled employee a trial period in an alternative role can itself be a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010: in this week's NLJ, Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve analyses the evolving case law
Caroline Shea KC and Richard Miller of Falcon Chambers examine the growing judicial focus on 'cynical breach' in restrictive covenant cases, in this week's issue of NLJ
Ian Gascoigne of LexisNexis dissects the uneasy balance between open justice and confidentiality in England’s civil courts, in this week's NLJ. From public hearings to super-injunctions, he identifies five tiers of privacy—from fully open proceedings to entirely secret ones—showing how a patchwork of exceptions has evolved without clear design
back-to-top-scroll