The applicant challenged a solicitor’s bill for the work in handling an estate. Two preliminary issues arose, as to the hourly rates applicable, and whether a value element should be charged. The court’s task is to assess a sum which is fair and reasonable.
Held: A rate above that generally charged by solicitors in the geographic area was justified where the practitioner was highly experienced and specialist. The claimant argued that a value element should no longer be paid. In view of the omnipresence of computer time recording systems, it is now wrong to charge on both a value element and a time element.
Judges:
Master Rodgers, Costs Judge
Citations:
[2002] EWHC 9008 (Costs)
Links:
Statutes:
Solicitors (Non Contentious Business) Remuneration Order 1994 3
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Jones and Another v Secretary of State for Wales and Another QBD 3-Dec-1996
Specialist provincial solicitors’ firm’s hourly cost rates were not limited by local average rates. . .
Appealed to – Jemma Trust Company Ltd v Liptrott, Forrester, Kippax Beaumont Lewis CA 24-Oct-2003
Solicitors sought to challenge an order disallowing a costs item for the administration of an estate which included a percentage of the estate.
Held: Despite advances in time recording, ‘we see no reason to say that it is no longer appropriate . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Jemma Trust Company Ltd v Liptrott, Forrester, Kippax Beaumont Lewis CA 24-Oct-2003
Solicitors sought to challenge an order disallowing a costs item for the administration of an estate which included a percentage of the estate.
Held: Despite advances in time recording, ‘we see no reason to say that it is no longer appropriate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Wills and Probate, Costs, Legal Professions
Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.175484
