Accosting costs

  • Print
  • Comments (3)

Readers' comments (3)

  • What is more important?

    Surely the question is this: is it better to win and incur high costs or to lose on the cheap? I have no idea of the figures involved but I'm quite certain that A&O saved its client an absolute fortune by winning that case. This is just free publicity for A&O. Who cares how much it costs, as long as you win big. A&O should adopt the Stella Artois mantra: "reassuringly expensive".

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • strip mining

    'Anonymous' presumes that Multiplex had anything to lose.

    The case appears to be what Multiplex sought to recover from CB for damages.

    Experience shows that many legal firms are not averse to strip mining a claim for fees by protracted negotiation, often leaving the combatant parties worse off than no action at all.

    Apart from that industry wide malaise, the directors of Multiplex seem to have lost sight of the math and one wonders how they will present that result to the shareholders at the next AGM..


    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Clients?

    It's easy to criticise the lawyers involved. However both clients are surely well aware of the dangers and costs of litigation. Perhaps the case went to trial on clients' instructions against the advice of their lawyers.

    Furthermore: the comment expressing surprise at Reid Minty's charges comparing with those of CC is bizarre. Lawyers acting on the other side of the same dispute having similar charges - surely this cannot be 'unbelievable'.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields


Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (3)