Portal Panic as Ministers Take Axe to Fee Levels

I find UK law fascinating. For one, it is only in the United Kingdom that you will hear of the term “Law costs draftsmen”. In gist, these are lawyers who specialize in calculating the litigation expense of one party to a lawsuit. This calculation is an itemized list of litigation costs essential to or connected to a case. This includes lawyers fee, photocopying expense, appearance fees, docket fees, etc.

More importantly, Law costs draftsmen do not only itemize the lists of expenses, but the same also need to be rationalized both in terms of appearance as well as pricing. I would also like to emphasize that the proper formalities need to be met; otherwise, the same can become void or unenforceable as against the client.

The cost lawyer can also assist in setting up procedures for monitoring cases. He can also help familiarize the office staff in these methods.

Fee Level Crack Downr
Law firms, practitioners, and Law costs draftsmen have taken a lot of heat recently because of fee padding. This means inclusion of litigation costs that were not actually incurred or increasing the collectible fees to almost usurious levels. The operative word here is “almost” in that the old way of thinking is that as long as you charge just below usurious rates you can get away with padding law costs.

Why the Limitation?
The rationale for law costs is that the same is made to indemnify the aggrieved party. This is in terms of bringing the lawsuit to demand his/her rights as well as the cost incurred to litigate the same. In other words, the prevailing party is indemnified only so far as it brings the same to the status quo or a state prior to the intrusion. Any fee collected over and above that amount violates the principles of indemnity and is therefore not allowed as litigation costs. This does not proscribe the litigants to add on other remedies such damages or any other relief that is punitive or exemplary in nature.

In My Opinionr
Cost draftsmen are just lying low for the time being and testing the waters so to speak. If it feels like the crackdown will yield substantive laws then it will meet with a lot of dissent. If the same is merely an indication of the courts flexing its muscles then the crackdown will pass and it will be business as usual in several months.