The future of litigation

  • Print
  • Comments (3)

Readers' comments (3)

  • There is no reason why litigation lawyers cannot offer fee caps or other fee arrangements to clients. This model works for transactional work and it can work for litigation fees as well.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Most good litigators care deeply about keeping their client's costs down, whilst achieving the best result possible for the client.

    Costs capping can work but only if done sensibly, and when it caters for the unforseen costs which are usually incurred when one party takes up a fresh issue. The main problem with litigation is that not everything can be anticipated in the litigation process, whereas in transactional work most tasks can be forseen and the amount of time to carry out the work accurately estimated.

    On the whole the system that we have at the minute works. It perhaps needs a little fine tuning, and the ridiculous guideline hourly rates need to be scrapped and replaced with a requirement that the hourly rate is reasonable (that will improve recovery and make for a happier client). But the system in general works to discourage meritless litigation and the racking up of fees.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • 4 years ago I had my house blown up whilst I was in it by the biggest explosion since the end of the war, I lost everything I had, my home, all contents and nearly lost my life.
    The Oil company responsible for the explosion have been found guilty of negligence and all other claim against them.
    After 4 years and having seen how the legal system works I have had nothing in compensation and the legal firms representing myself and the oil company have had fees of over £500,000 paid. IS THIS JUSTICE ?
    For further information see www.iansilverstein.com/buncefield

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down.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)