ASSESSING BILLS OF COSTS: GIVE DETAILS OF THE SIGNATORY AND OF THE FEE EARNERS OR YOUR BILL WILL STRUCK OUT: “AN OUNCE OF OPENNESS IS CHEAPER THAN ANY ARGUMENT”

One Response

1. 

   Pro Bono · October 1, 2021 at 11:54:24 · →

   Yet another illustration of how absurdly convoluted the whole process of assessing costs is. It shouldn’t matter which named individual has done the work – all that matters is whether the work was appropriate for that level of fee-earner.

   But even this amount of detail is ridiculous. The assessing judge is only getting a snapshot of the case, and doesn’t know the real history of the matter or why any particular fee-earner was employed at any one time. His job should be to take a much more broad brush approach – almost akin to the old trope about weighing the file – rather than do this nonsensical `How many angels on a pinhead?’ exercise.

   The whole system of assessing costs is long outdated, and needs to be abolished. It needs replacing with a system of employed costs experts – probably experienced litigation solicitors – who would read through the file and use their real world experience to decide what a reasonable overall charge would be. That would then be the recoverable amount, and although challenges would obviously have to be allowed there would be financial penalties for getting it wrong, so as to discourage petty arguments.

   But I’m not holding my breath!

Comments are closed.