header-logo header-logo

Mediate—or pay the price

01 February 2007 / William Gibson
Issue: 7258 / Categories: Features , Costs , Fees
printer mail-detail

A hike in court fees would encourage more mediation in costs disputes, reports William Gibson

There are rumours on the grapevine that the percentage-based court fee for costs assessments will return. Before April 1999 there was a major incentive for parties in litigation to settle the resulting costs claim by negotiation or mediation. Referring the matter to court for adjudication on a fair and reasonable costs figure attracted a taxing fee of 7.5% of the total value of the bill, half of which was paid in advance when the papers were lodged in court.

The Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), surprisingly, abolished this lucrative source of revenue and replaced it with a flat fee, originally £160 in the High Court, currently £600. Suddenly bills in seven-figure amounts, which would have attracted an additional payment in excess of £75,000 to have a court assessment, could go through the same process for a nominal sum. Now, when even cases which settle before action can have costs-only

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll