This time last year, the biggest piece of litigation in the English courts was the Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI) trial, which opened in January 2004. Twelve months on, nothing has changed. Lovells and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer are still tied up acting for the liquidators of BCCI and the Bank of England respectively. Gordon Pollock QC's record 79-day opening statement on behalf of the liquidators has been trumped by Nicholas Stadlen QC's 119-day marathon, which concluded in May 2005.

Other cases have opened and closed while BCCI has been rumbling on in Court 73. Nearby, in Court 76, the Equitable Life negligence case has provided plenty of drama. Herbert Smith, representing Equitable, came under attack from defendant solicitors Barlow Lyde & Gilbert over its disclosure exercise for the case, and in July was forced to drop a large portion of its claim.

As ever, the UK courts made a number of crucial decisions this year. In December 2004 the Law Lords ruled on the detention of terrorist suspects in the Belmarsh appeal, finding against the Government. That case was spearheaded by the indomitable Gareth Peirce of BIRNBERG PEIRCE, ably backed up by a counsel team led by Matrix Chambers' Ben Emmerson QC.

The Lords also turned their attention to matters fiscal. The July 2005 ruling over bank debts in Re Spectrum Plus resolved many questions that had been troubling insolvency practitioners over the order in which creditors should be paid. Allen & Overy (A&O) acted for the unsuccessful party, National Westminster Bank.

Lower down the courts' pecking order, the UK saw its slice of Enron action as Slaughter and May successfully defended JPMorgan Chase and Jersey special purpose vehicle Mahonia against allegations of links to the collapsed energy giant.

Aside from the big cases, the courts were fairly quiet, resulting in a mixed year for City litigation practices. Most increases in revenue were small, and several firms saw a drop in income from contentious work.

One of those was Clifford Chance. Litigation revenues fell from 24 per cent of total turnover in 2004 to 20 per cent in 2005, equating to a £42m drop in monetary terms. This was directly attributable to the shrinkage of the US operation and the closure of the West Coast offices. But the 87 partners brought in a healthy £2.1m each. The firm remains top of the litigation table due to its size, but the gap is closing between it and the chasing pack.

Clifford Chance's biggest case of the year was the split capital trust investigation conducted by the Financial Services Authority (FSA). The firm, initially acting for Collins Stewart but later taking on a wider role for a group of investment trusts, negotiated a settlement with the FSA that prevented the need for full-blown litigation.

Coming up behind Clifford Chance in the table is Freshfields and Lovells, although in reverse order from last year, with Freshfields second place on the table. It was a good year for Freshfields' contentious practice. Both litigation income and revenue per partner (RPP) increased, and dispute resolution now accounts for 16.6 per cent of the firm's turnover. Despite this, Freshfields did not feature in many of the year's big reported cases save for the House of Lords privilege hearing in relation to Three Rivers District Council & ors v Bank of England. The Law Lords indicated in July 2004 that Freshfields would win the case. In November they handed down a full judgment which was applauded as safeguarding legal advice privilege.

On the other side of that case was Lovells, which continues to have a healthy presence in the litigation market. Contentious work accounts for 30 per cent of turnover, meaning the income from litigation dropped slightly to £111m last year.

Bringing the BCCI claim and its spin-offs is taking up a fair chunk of Lovells' time. As well as Three Rivers and the main BCCI trial, the firm fought a related claim against the Bank of India. In June 2005 the Court of Appeal ruled in Lovells' favour, overturning an earlier High Court judgment won by Penningtons for the Indian bank. Another claim, against the Bank of America, settled in January 2005, with Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw on the other side. However, Lovells also has a role in the ongoing measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine litigation, acting for pharmaceutical company Merck in defending claims brought by parents of children allegedly affected adversely by the vaccine.

Maintaining its place as the fourth-largest litigation firm in The Lawyer UK 100 Annual Report is Herbert Smith, although litigation as a percentage of the firm's total practice has dropped for the second successive year. The end of the last financial year was also the end of David Gold's reign as litigation head, as he moved on to become the firm's senior partner, with Sonya Leydecker taking over his role.

Although less crucial to the firm as a whole than it used to be, Herbert Smith's dispute resolution team is still regarded highly and the firm continues to be involved in major cases such as the IP dispute Cambridge Antibody Technology v Abbott Biotechnology. At the beginning of the current financial year, Herbert Smith brought in Murray Rosen QC and Ian Gatt QC to kickstart its `in-house chambers'. The effect this will have on the litigation practice is yet to be seen.

Other City firms have slipped down the litigation table this year. A&O and Linklaters are less visible than their magic circle competitors, with a much smaller percentage of turnover coming from contentious work. A&O's biggest case, National Westminster Bank v Spectrum Plus, reached two milestones in the last 12 months, being heard in the Court of Appeal and then the House of Lords.

Linklaters, meanwhile, derives less than 10 per cent of global income from litigation, but with a team of just 31 partners RPP is high, just behind that of Clifford Chance. The smaller City firms had mixed fortunes over the year. CMS Cameron McKenna could not consolidate on last year's superlative performance, and litigation revenue dropped both as an absolute figure and as a percentage of total turnover. That meant revenue per litigator dropped too, although it is still above 2003 figures at £1.3m.

Simmons & Simmons, meanwhile, had a brilliant year. The litigation department now brings in 27 per cent of the firm's total and was up £12m from 2004. RPP broke through the £1m barrier for the first time too, as the team began recruiting again after a short hiatus. International work, particularly that related to trusts, was up. In April 2005 Simmons recorded a significant House of Lords victory for the Law Debenture Trust Corporation against the Concord Trust (advised by Bingham McCutchen) in a bondholder dispute.

It was a good year for the insurance-heavy firms. Although none bring in as much RPP as the more commercial litigation-focused practices, firms such as Irwin Mitchell, Clyde & Co, and Holman Fenwick & Willan reported good years overall. And a large proportion of income for each firm comes from litigation.

Irwin Mitchell's turnover is boosted by a hefty and successful personal injury (PI) claims department, and although 80 per cent of total turnover comes from resolving disputes, the firm has just 63 litigation partners. Cases include a challenge to a European directive on vitamin supplements.

Clyde & Co' practice was strengthened during the year by several hires, including former Clifford Chance litigation partner Stephen Lewis, who joined the firm as an insurance arbitration consultant. The firm still succeeded in lifting revenue per litigation partner to £850,000. Next year Clydes is likely to see further improvement with the addition of aviation boutique BEAUMONT & SON.

Like Clydes, Holmans derives much of its work from core insurance areas such as transport and shipping. Some of the litigation overlaps between sectors ± one of the firm's biggest cases in 2004 was the final chapter of the dispute over the Exxon Valdez oil spill, which saw Holmans win an appeal brought against client Brandywine Re over liability. Much of Holmans' contentious work goes unseen ± the firm estimates that 80 per cent of its shipping cases are arbitrated.

Barlow Lyde & Gilbert and Richards Butler, both traditionally strong insurance and general litigation practices, performed less well this year than last. BLG's revenue per litigation partner is down, but partner numbers are up. The professional negligence practice continues to be instructed by the majority of solicitors, accountants and other professionals which have claims against them, and the defence of Ernst & Young in Equitable Life appears to be going well.

Richards Butler lost two of its big-name litigators at the end of the year, as John Hull and Lista Cannon defected for US firms, but the firm added new hires, including BLG's Richard Spafford. Spafford brought with him The Accident Group (TAG) litigation. Dispute resolution contributed 3 per cent lower revenues this year than last, thanks to strong performances elsewhere in the firm. But Richards Butler continues to have a decent case list, with notable victories last year including a Court of Appeal win for the government of Mongolia.

The biggest rise in litigation turnover came from DLA. Last year's £27.5m litigation income, 10 per cent of the firm's total, rose to £61m, or 19 per cent of the total. The firm also succeeded in pushing up its RPP. DLA Piper estimates that, globally, there are 1,200 fee-earners engaged on contentious work, which is surely one of the largest litigation groups in the world.

Litigation's real stars, however, come nearly at the bottom of the table. Although Slaughters' contentious team brings in just 14 per cent of the firm's total, there are only 11 dispute resolution partners globally. Each makes £3.7m, a figure way above any other firm in the top 20. Much of Slaughters' dispute resolution practice supports the corporate team, last year supplying highlights such as the injunction against Freshfields for Marks & Spencer. But regulatory work is also going strong and things look rosy for this small but effective department.