0370 270 6000

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

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.



Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.


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.


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