header-logo header-logo

What is the price of law?

12 February 2016
Issue: 7686 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Costs lawyer warns commercial legal services clients are wising up to increasing costs

Clients are wising up to excessive costs, a leading costs lawyer has warned in the wake of a report that found Magic Circle partners billing £1,000 per hour.

The Centre for Policy Studies report, The Price of Law, produced by Jim Diamond, says hourly rates for a partner at a top London firm are now at “the highest level ever recorded”. This means “those seeking to comply with UK legal procedure are forced to pay extremely high costs to do so—high enough to restrict access to law, particularly for smaller business clients for whom bills can be prohibitive”.

The report points out that there is a lack of transparency since average hourly rates are not published online, and that “the remarkable similarity in the rates charged by each of the Magic Circle law firms suggests a shortage of competition between them”. The report makes no suggestion of collusion between the firms, but does take aim at the “outdated and unsustainable” concept of the billable hour.

Billable hours also came under fire last month from Lord Justice Jackson, who called for fixed fees for civil claims valued at up to £250,000.

Responding to Diamond’s report, Sue Nash, chair of the Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL), says: “I believe there is a real ‘wind of change’ among purchasers of commercial legal services who are beginning to realise that their legal spend is increasing and/or buying them less.

“There are smaller London-based firms probably every bit as competent but charging up to 50% less and then there are market-disruptors like Riverview Law. Costs lawyers have the experience and skills to analyse legal spend for commercial purchasers and to help ensure that they are getting value for money.

“However, we must not forget that these rates do not reflect the work done—or fees charged—by the vast majority of solicitors across the land. As for those solicitors and junior barristers doing legal aid work, with some hourly rates as low as £26 (and the absolute maximum for the most rare and complex cases is about £140 an hour), the vast majority can only dream of being able to bill £1,000 in a week let alone an hour.”

 
Issue: 7686 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Sian Langer & Gemma Parker

Clyde & Co—Sian Langer & Gemma Parker

Firm strengthens catastrophic injury capability with partner promotions

DWF—Dean Gormley

DWF—Dean Gormley

Finance and restructuring team offering expands in Manchester with partner hire

Taylor Rose—Vicki Maflin

Taylor Rose—Vicki Maflin

Firm announces appointment of head of remortgage

NEWS
The long-awaited Getty Images v Stability AI judgment arrived at the end of last year—but not with the seismic impact many expected. In this week's issue of NLJ, experts from Arnold & Porter dissect a ruling that is ‘historic’ yet tightly confined
The UK Supreme Court may be deciding fewer cases, but its impact in 2025 was anything but muted. In this week's NLJ, Professor Emeritus Brice Dickson of Queen’s University Belfast reviews a year marked by historically low output, a striking rise in jointly authored judgments, and a continued decline in dissent. High-profile rulings on biological sex under the Equality Act, public access to Dartmoor, and fairness in sexual offence trials ensured the court’s voice carried far beyond the Strand
Delays at HM Land Registry are no longer a background irritation but a growing source of professional risk. Writing in NLJ this week, Phil Murrin of DAC Beachcroft explores how the ‘registration gap’—now stretching up to two years in complex cases—is fuelling client frustration, priority disputes, and negligence claims
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
back-to-top-scroll