Report comment

In theory this would seem to be a sensible idea but in practice, law firms cannot provide a realistic estimate at the start of any case (no matter how good their costs knowledge/expertise) .

For example, if someone instructs solicitors to pursue injunction proceedings with a view to commencing substantive proceedings in a defamation claim, it is wholly unrealistic to suppose that the instructed law firm is in a position to give any idea (at day 1) as to what their overall costs are likely to be. At that stage they have no idea as to what work will be involved or how long the matter will take to resolve. The only thing they will know is what hourly rates they charge.

Nobody can estimate how long a case will take from start to finish as the latter is always unpredictable and in view of this, a very general (and quite meaningless) estimate is the inevitable outcome.

So whilst lawyers will do what is asked of them i.e provide a general estimate (punctuated with “these costs can go up as well as down” type disclaimers), this fails to solve the problem. Clients are none the wiser and whilst the transparency box has been ticked, nothing has actually been achieved.