Simplifying procedures not lowering GHRs is the best way to contain litigation costs, says Richard Langley
If press reports are to be believed, the Master of the Rolls is about to publish new guideline hourly rates (GHRs) to be applied when assessing costs payable between the parties. The indications are that in most cases the GHRs (last revised in 2010) will be reduced.
Since there can be little doubt that the cost to law firms of providing legal services will generally have increased since 2010, it follows that any reductions in the GHRs must be the product of a judicial policy objective to reduce the costs of litigation.
It is legitimate to question why the judiciary regards it as its business to fix matters of policy such as this. No doubt, government is delighted to let the judges tackle this for them.
No direct correlation
The obvious problem with this particular method of bearing down on costs is that there is no direct correlation between reducing the costs payable by the
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
