0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

Higgs v Camden and Islington HA, Queens Bench Division, 16 January 2003

29 January 2003
The issues

Costs – complex claim.

The facts

The Claimant pursued a clinical negligence claim against the Defendant, in which over 3.5 million was recovered. The issue came before Costs Judge Roger on Detailed Assessment of Claimant’s costs. The Costs Judge held that the hourly rate of £300.00 per hour for the Claimant’s Solicitor was reasonable; that there had been properly supervised delegation from a Senior Partner to an Assistant Solicitor; and that it was reasonable for the Partner in charge of the case, apart from that delegation to have done the majority of the work. The paying party argued that the hourly rate for the Solicitor was excessive; that the rate was excessive in comparison with comparable cases; and that the hourly rate should have reflected the fact that there was supervisory work involved.

The decision

1. The claim was a complex and valuable claim and it was reasonable for the Senior Partner to have done most of the work. Where that work had been done, it had been done more effectively and quickly than if it had been delegated.

2. Although the rates were high they were within the discretion of the Costs Judge.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


Legal updates

Non-payment of insurance premiums during the Coronavirus pandemic

The forced closure of many businesses as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Recent reports from the Office for National Statistics state that the economy was 25% smaller in April than it was in February this year.


Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up