Ben Summerfield & Kirsty O’Connor return to explore why the legal profession has been reluctant to embrace alternative fee arrangements
In our previous article, we reviewed the main alternative means of paying for, or financing, litigation costs following the Jackson reforms (“Will the alternative become the norm?”, NLJ, 15 May 2015, pp 19-20). We suggested that there are still a significant number of practitioners largely unaware of the options available, and who still think of fee arrangements as nothing other than a discussion about the actual hourly rate charged.
In this article, we explore some of the opportunities and challenges presented to lawyers and clients by alternative fee structures and ask whether they do, in reality, pose a threat to the traditional hourly rate.
Fixed/capped fees
Fixed fees, frequently set by reference to the stage of the proceedings, can be attractive to clients who are able to absorb the cash flow demands of litigation, but need to be certain of the costs of proceeding
