header-logo header-logo

No new guideline hourly rates

20 April 2015
Issue: 7649 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The Master of the Rolls has decided to freeze the guideline hourly rates (GHRs), due to the poor response to its call for evidence. 

Lord Dyson initially said in July that he had no “evidential base” on which to make any changes to the GHRs, but would hold further discussions with the Law Society and government. 

Last week, he announced that these discussions had made no “material change” to the position. The GHRs will therefore remain at their current rates, which were set in 2010.

GHRs help judges assess costs by providing guidelines for the recoverable hourly rate for different grades of fee earner in different regions of England and Wales.

Lord Dyson said: “I am conscious of a number of trends in the legal services market and other factors that are rendering GHRs less and less relevant.” These include advances in technology and business practices; the “ever-increasing sub-specialisation of the law which is seeing the market increasingly dictate rates in some fields (particularly commercial law)”; “the judiciary’s use of proportionality as a driving principle in assessing costs”; and greater familiarity with costs budgeting among judiciary and practitioners alike.

He called for greater use of fixed costs in litigation.

Sue Nash, chairman of the Association of Costs Lawyers, says: “While any decision which gives certainty is to be welcomed, it is unfortunate that the costs committee was unable to fulfill its brief.  

“This was a golden opportunity for the legal profession to help shape the debate about the value of legal services but the outcome was made inevitable given the limited responses to the consultation coupled with the lack of resources afforded to the committee. It is difficult to see what other decision the Master of the Rolls could have taken in the circumstances.

“What will be interesting to see now is whether this will give added impetus to the increasingly wide variety of alternative fee and billing arrangements being entered between solicitors and their clients.”

 

Issue: 7649 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Slater Heelis—Oliver Banks

Slater Heelis—Oliver Banks

Manchester firm strengthens Court of Protection expertise with partner hire

Talbots Law—Sara Pickerin & Nicholas Playford

Talbots Law—Sara Pickerin & Nicholas Playford

Agricultural law team expands with senior director appointments

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

NEWS
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold dives into the quirks of civil practice, from the Court of Appeal’s fierce defence of form N510 to fresh reminders about compliance and interest claims, in this week's Civil Way
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has restated a fundamental truth, writes John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke, in this week's NLJ: only authorised persons can conduct litigation. The decision sparked alarm, but Gould stresses it merely confirms the Legal Services Act 2007
The government’s decision to make the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) the Single Professional Services Supervisor marks a watershed in the UK’s fight against money laundering, says Rebecca Hughes of Corker Binning in this week's NLJ. The FCA will now oversee 60,000 firms across legal and accountancy sectors—a massive expansion of remit that raises questions over resources and readiness 
The High Court's decision in Parfitt v Jones [2025] EWHC 1552 (Ch) provided a striking reminder of the need to instruct the right expert in retrospective capacity assessments, says Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell in NLJ this week
Paige Coulter of Quinn Emanuel reports on the UK’s first statutory definition of SLAPPs under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll