High Court Representation

Maidhci

Can anyone offer some insight as to the usual barrister representation in a High Court personal injuries case?

The plaintiff will be represented by his solicitor but I presume that there will be a minimum of one Senior Counsel and / or (Junior) Counsel involved also? Trying to estimate costs etc. etc. Thanks.

hullaballoo

Frustrating as it is, you're asking how long a piece of string is. Each and every case varies in terms of the number of lawyers required. Even a straight-forward looking personal injuries case may require more than one senior counsel and 2 juniors. Some may only require 1 junior.

Usually, what happens is that a junior will draft proceedings and advise as to the need for a senior. The senior may then do an advice on proofs recommending that additional juniors or seniors are briefed. Sometimes, in particularly complex cases, this advice will be updated recommending more barristers are briefed but this would be almost unheard of for a straight-up personal injuries case.

Recommendations to brief more barristers are not made lightly because each of their fees has to be justifiable before taxation of costs.

Pat Mustard

Maidhci wrote: »

Trying to estimate costs etc. etc. Thanks.

Trying to estimate High Court costs is difficult. That's why costs accountants exist; they advise as to costs where even experienced solicitors and barristers might not have an accurate answer.

'How long is a piece of string' may not be what you want to hear but unfortunately it's not an unreasonable description of the position without the advice of a costs accountant who has been briefed with a comprehensive file.

griffin100

As an example I was involved in a fairly minor PI hearing last week and each side had an instructing solicitor, SC (and devil), JC and consultant engineer in the court room (plus a total of 4 other witnesses). It took 5hrs of waiting to get in front of a judge and we are back again to finish next week. The costs are going to dwarf any likely award.

McCrack

Costs are seperate and in addition to a Plaintiff's award. In other words the legal costs (party/party) dont come out of the award.

My own experience as a Plaintiff solr on provincial Personal Injury circuits is one BL and two SC are briefed in PI cases with fees shared on the usual 2/8, 3/8 & 3/8 basis. I think it would be lacking somewhat if Senior Counsel were not briefed in the High Court. I personally would never run or settle a High Court case without the input of Senior Counsel.

hullaballoo

griffin100 wrote: »

As an example I was involved in a fairly minor PI hearing last week and each side had an instructing solicitor, SC (and devil), JC and consultant engineer in the court room (plus a total of 4 other witnesses). It took 5hrs of waiting to get in front of a judge and we are back again to finish next week. The costs are going to dwarf any likely award.

Just a point of information, SCs (senior counsels) don't have devils. Only junior counsels can take a devil. It might be counter-intuitive from the outside but junior counsel is a title that refers to all qualified barristers until they choose to apply and are accepted for membership of the inner bar.

When I was a devil, my master had been in practice for eighteen years. In my second year, I worked with a junior who qualified in 1979.

The point is that junior and senior in the context of barristers don't mean what you might think. Some barristers never opt to be called to the inner bar and remain as junior counsel until they retire or die.

lawfilly

They also wont see any of those costs

naughto

griffin100 wrote: »

As an example I was involved in a fairly minor PI hearing last week and each side had an instructing solicitor, SC (and devil), JC and consultant engineer in the court room (plus a total of 4 other witnesses). It took 5hrs of waiting to get in front of a judge and we are back again to finish next week. The costs are going to dwarf any likely award.

How is the costs going to dwarf the Award if the PI is successfully in his/her claim.do they not be awarded costs as well as there award?

griffin100

naughto wrote: »

How is the costs going to dwarf the Award if the PI is successfully in his/her claim.do they not be awarded costs as well as there award?

If they win they will be awarded costs as well as damages. The point I was making is that the value of the damages will be significantly less than the legal costs of the case as it's a fairly minor injury (unless the judge decides to make a ridiculous award as one or two are prone to doing).

griffin100

hullaballoo wrote: »

Just a point of information, SCs (senior counsels) don't have devils. Only junior counsels can take a devil. It might be counter-intuitive from the outside but junior counsel is a title that refers to all qualified barristers until they choose to apply and are accepted for membership of the inner bar.

When I was a devil, my master had been in practice for eighteen years. In my second year, I worked with a junior who qualified in 1979.

The point is that junior and senior in the context of barristers don't mean what you might think. Some barristers never opt to be called to the inner bar and remain as junior counsel until they retire or die.

All the time I have spent in the HC and I never knew that (and I have friends who are (non practicing) barristers).

hullaballoo

griffin100 wrote: »

All the time I have spent in the HC and I never knew that (and I have friends who are (non practicing) barristers).

Sure no one knows this stuff. My own parents don't even know what exactly it is I do!

It's good to have this place to try and explain these things.

naughto

griffin100 wrote: »

If they win they will be awarded costs as well as damages. The point I was making is that the value of the damages will be significantly less than the legal costs of the case as it's a fairly minor injury (unless the judge decides to make a ridiculous award as one or two are prone to doing).

How does it work then if a case is settled who pays the legal costs?
Are the costs payed out of the settment or does each side pay there own

griffin100

Depends on how the case is settled. In my experience as the person who manages PI claims for my employer:

1. You can settle before going into court for a fixed amount all in - plaintiff pays his own legal costs out of this and whatever is left is his. Defendant pays own legal costs. In most cases defendants insurers will cover everything.

2. You settle for an amount plus costs without going into court. Plaintiff gets the full amount, his costs are paid and the defendant pays their own costs. Again defendants insurers will usually cover everything.

3. Judge makes a decision in court. If plaintiff wins he get an award and all of his costs paid by the defendant. If he loses he gets nothing and has to pay his own costs, and he would also be liable for the defendants costs.

naughto

For the 1st one the plaintiff would have to know what his legal costs would be but I thought you could not get taxation of costs until the case was finished.
I don't think to many like the all in job especially if there's a high legal bill.there would be rows over the bill.

One more question what makes insurance companies settle rather than fight it in court surly the insurance company pockets would be deeper than the plaintiffs hence have the best of the best as in engineers,doc ect

griffin100

IME the all in offer is usually made when the defendant feels they have a very good case and are happy to take their chances in front of a judge.

Insurance companies will settle for a variety of reasons. One thing that must always be considered is that going in front of a judge ramps up costs and can be a lottery when it comes to awards. Insurance companies have deep pockets but make economic decisions when it comes to settling claims.