header-logo header-logo

12 December 2022
Issue: 8007 / Categories: Legal News , Costs , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Time for reform on costs?

More than half of costs lawyers have said they hope the landmark decision in Belsner will trigger a review of the ‘outdated’ Solicitors Act 1974.

Four in five of those responding to an Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL) survey said reform is needed, especially to remove the preliminary arguments over whether a bill is actually a bill (for example, final bills, interim bills, statute bills and Chamberlain bills). The Law Society, the ACL and the senior costs judge have also backed a review of the Act.

ACL chair Jack Ridgway said: ‘It is no surprise that costs lawyers are so keen on updating the Solicitors Act 1974—we see on a day-to-day basis how it is not conducive to the efficient and effective resolution of costs disputes.’

In October, the Court of Appeal held that personal injury cases that settle in the claims portal are non-contentious business for the purposes of costs, in Belsner v CAM Legal Services [2022] EWCA Civ 1387. Therefore, the court stated, complaints about deductions of costs from damages should be directed to the Legal Ombudsman rather than court.

The majority verdict on Belsner among costs lawyers is that it will shift the focus of costs disputes rather than curb them altogether. Some 30% of costs lawyers surveyed thought Belsner would spell the end for court challenges to deductions. However, 60% believed challenges would continue, based on the ‘fair and reasonable’ test for non-contentious costs.

Consistent with previous years, only 19% of costs lawyers said solicitors stuck to budgets—44% said they sometimes, and 23% always, went over budget. More positively, 45% said they were seeing more applications to vary budgets.

Some 58% of costs lawyers have grown their practices in the past year, 35% by up to 10%, and 23% by more than that. Some survey respondents expressed concern about fixed recoverable costs. However, 47% predicted fixed costs will give rise to disputes, creating work for costs lawyers.

A majority of respondents (56%) supported calls for regulatory review with the aim of strengthening the role of costs lawyers by, for example, making them more open to instruction directly by clients.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll