Costing: Costs cap goes local
published in adapted format in Law Society Journal, October 2007, Volume 45, page 30)
This article analyses when and in what circumstances the recovery of costs is restricted in claims brought in the Local Court of NSW.
(published in Australasian Legal Business, Issue 5.7, 2007, page 52)
This article interviews and quotes both directors as leaders in the field of costing and considers trends in legal costing. The article can be examined at issue 5.7 of the Australian Legal business Journal. However, the link below provides a transcript of the interview.
Also published in adapted format in Law Society Journal, April 2007, Volume 45, page 22
The consequences of rejecting a defendant’s offer of compromise have taken a fresh turn. The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 were amended with effect from 8 December 2006. The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (Amendment No.11) 2006 have introduced a range of amendments including a significant new provision: Rule 42.15A.
It’s seriously time to get your costs agreements in order
Also published in adapted format in Law Society Journal, December 2006, Volume 44, page 46
In the context of the Wentworth decision, of stricter disclosure requirements under the Legal Profession Act 2004 and of the recommendations of the Legal Fees Review Panel regarding defective disclosure (and defective ongoing disclosure), defective disclosure practices may no longer result only in an increased party/party solicitor/client gap on assessment but, quite possibly, result in referral of the legal practitioner to the Legal Services Commissioner, together with a reduction in the amount recovered.
Read More »New disclosure requirements and the indemnity principle