UK: What Future For Costs Negotiators?

Last Updated: 9 April 2003
Article by Adrian Cottam

Chief Master Hurst, Senior Costs Judge, held in Sajida Ahmed -v- P Powell (Supreme Court Costs Office, 28 January 2003) that where there are standing instructions from liability insurers for costs to be dealt with by costs negotiators and the panel solicitors involvement comes to an end, and the costs negotiators are paid by results then (i) the costs negotiators did not have a right of audience in relation to detailed assessment hearings (ii) the terms of payment to costs negotiators to appear at detailed assessment hearings were champertous

The case concerned the status of costs negotiators instructed by liability insurers to act on their behalf in relation to the question of costs. Costs negotiators have come to prominence recently and are typically paid by results in that they receive a percentage of the reduction in the amount of costs which they achieve on behalf of the liability insurer.

The Facts

Any person may set themselves up as a costs negotiator without passing any examinations or joining a professional body. There is an Association of Law Costs Draftsman which requires its members to undergo training, to pass exams and to abide by a code of conduct.

On 5 November 2000 the Claimant was injured in a Road Traffic Accident. Proceedings were commenced and followed the usual course with Defence, allocation and listing before settlement was reached. It was not possible to agree the Claimant’s solicitor’s costs and detailed assessment proceedings were commenced on 29 January 2002. Points of Dispute were served and the issue of costs came before a District Judge. The solicitors for the Claimant raised the question of whether the costs negotiators appointed by the Defendant’s insurers had a right of audience.

The Issues

(i) did costs negotiators have a right of audience in relation to the detailed assessment hearing ?

(ii) were the terms of payment to the costs negotiators champertous?

Counsel for the Claimant submitted that the costs negotiators did not have rights of audience in the detailed assessment hearing for three main reasons:

(i) they were not properly instructed as agents of the solicitor on the record and cannot be said to be in the "temporary employ" of the solicitors on the record.

(ii) the basis upon which they charge for their work (including attending hearings) is based on a illegal contingency fee agreement.

(iii) costs negotiators are not regulated by any professional body or organisation.

The Law

Rights Of Audience

Section 27 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 deals with the rights of audience

"27. Rights of Audience.

(1) The question whether a person has a right of audience before a court or in relation to any proceedings, shall be determined solely in accordance with the provisions of this part.

(2) A person shall have a right of audience in relation to any proceedings only in the following cases:

(a) where –

(i) he has a right of audience before the court in relation to those proceedings granted by the appropriate authorised body; and

(ii) that body’s qualification regulations and rules of conduct have been approved for the purpose of this section to the granting of that right; …or…

(b) where –

(i) he is employed (whether wholly or on part) or is otherwise engaged to assist in the conduct of litigation and is doing so under instruction given (either generally or in relation to the proceedings) by a qualified litigator and

(ii) the proceedings are being heard in Chambers in the High Court or a County Court and are not reserved family proceedings.

(3) In this section –

"qualified litigator" means –

(i) any practising solicitor;

(ii) any recognised body; and

(iii) any person who is exempt from the requirement to hold a practising certificate by virtue of section 88 of the Solicitors Act 1974

Section 119 of the 1990 Act deals with the interpretation as follows:

"Advocacy services" means any service which it would be reasonable to expect a person who is exercising, or contemplating exercising, a right of audience in relation to any proceedings, or contemplated proceedings, to provide;

"Litigation services" means any service which it would be reasonable to expect a person who is exercising, or contemplating exercising, a right to conduct litigation in relation to any proceedings, or contemplated proceedings, to provide;

"Rights of audience" means the right to exercise any of the functions of appearing before and addressing a court including the calling and examining of witnesses."

Note 47.14.7 "Rights of audience on detailed assessment" in the White Book was referred to. The note is as follows:

"In detailed assessment proceedings, rights of audience may be exercised by any counsel properly instructed by solicitors, any solicitor or employee of a solicitor representing one of the parties to the proceedings. If the party is legally represented costs consultants, costs draftsman and the like can only be heard on the basis that they are temporarily, and for the purpose of those detailed assessment proceedings, employees of the solicitors representing the party. The solicitors are responsible for the conduct of the detailed assessment hearing and cannot be responsible merely by instructing a costs draftsman."

The Law Of Champerty

A person is guilty of maintenance if he supports litigation in which he has no legitimate concern without just cause or excuse (see Chitty on Contracts 28th Ed [1999], Vol.1, para 17-050.) Champerty "occurs when the person maintaining another stipulates for a share of the proceeds of the action or suit" (Chitty paragraph 17-054). Because the question of whether maintenance and champerty can be justified is one of public policy, the law must be kept under review as public policy changes.

In Trendtex Trading Corpn -v- Credit Suisse [1980] 1 QB 629 at p. 663 Oliver LJ remarked :

"There is, I think, a clear requirement of public policy that officers of the court should be inhibited from putting themselves in a position where their own interests may conflict with their duties to the court by agreement, for instance, of so called "contingency fees".

The introduction of conditional fees shows that this requirement of public policy is no longer absolute.

The decision in Giles -v- Thomspon [1993] 3 All ER 321; [1994] 1 AC 142, makes it clear that, in any individual case, it is necessary to look at the agreement under attack in order to see whether it tends to conflict with existing public policy. At page 153, Lord Mustill said that "the rule, now in the course of attenuation, which forbids a solicitor from accepting payment for professional services calculated as a proportion of the sum recovered from the defendant … survives nowadays, so far as it survives at all, largely as a rule of professional conduct. With respect, this statement is not correct. The basis of the rule is statutory….".

The Court of Appeal went on to consider Rule 8 of the Solicitors Practice Rules 1990 which forbids the use of contingency fees. The court also considered Section 58 of the 1990 Act which deals with conditional fee agreements and the relevant Conditional Fee Agreement Regulations. Conditional fee agreements under section 58 embrace only agreements for the provision of litigation or advocacy services concluded by those with rights to conduct litigation or rights of audience.

Section 58 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 evidences a radical change in attitude of public policy to the practice of conducting litigation on terms that the obligation to pay fees will be contingent upon success. This is now possible, subject to requirements imposed by that section. These requirements do not appear to mitigate the mischief that led to the banning of contingency fees – the undesirability of the interests of officers of the court conflicting with their duties to the court. Rather the requirements appear designed to protect litigants under conditional fee agreements who, when the section was first enacted, were required to pay any uplift out of their damages. Conditional fees are now permitted in order to give effect to another facet of public policy – the desirability of access to justice.

The Agreement Between Costs Negotiators And Liability Insurers

The cost negotiators were regularly instructed by the liability insurer. The cost negotiators were paid on the basis of a percentage of savings of costs achieved. Revised terms had subsequently been agreed that the cost negotiators were to be paid on the basis of a commission payable at a set rate provided that the cost negotiators achieved a monthly average gross saving of a given percentage of the claimant’s costs over a twelve month period for a guaranteed number of cases.

The Evidence As To The Issues Arising

Upon receipt of the notice of commencement of assessment the panel solicitors wrote to the costs negotiators as follows:

"We enclose our file in relation to the above claim in accordance with [our liability insurers] protocol for the determination of third party costs.

We have told the Claimant’s solicitors that you will be dealing with costs …

At the conclusion of the matter we would be grateful if you would return the complete file, so that we may archive the matter, together with a short note stating the amount of costs agreed/assessed and conformation that the cost payment has been discharged."

There were also a number of attendance notes which it was argued demonstrated it was in fact the costs negotiators who were instructing the panel solicitors rather than the other way round.

The Right Of Audience Issue

It was submitted that it was simply a matter of construction of Section 27(2)(e). Master Hurst did not accept that the Section gave cost negotiators a right of audience. He held that the cost negotiators were employed by the liability insurers on the interpretation of the letters passing between the panel solicitors appointed by the liability insurers and the cost negotiators.

Therefore the cost negotiators were neither assisting in the conduct of litigation nor doing so under the instructions given (either generally or in relation to the proceedings) by a qualified litigator. Standing instructions from the liability insurers that all costs were to be dealt with by cost negotiators, and the letter from the panel solicitors, made it clear that the solicitors did not expect to hear further from the cost negotiators until the conclusion of the matter. The panel solicitors were not supplying any services to the Defendant and were merely allowing the use of their name in the detailed assessment proceedings.

Master Hurst did not think that there was anything inherently wrong in a requirement by an insurance company that, when costs come to be determined, a particular firm of costs draftsman should be instructed. However, those instructions must come from the instructing solicitors who have themselves been properly instructed and who are required to consider the claim for costs and advise the client.

The Champerty Issue

It was accepted that the cost negotiators terms of remuneration amounted to a contingency fee agreement.

Counsel for the claimant relied on what the Master of the Rolls said in R (Factortame Ltd) -v- Transport Secretary (No.8) [2002] EWCA Civ 932; [2002] 3 WLR 1104:" 84. A contingency fee agreement which entitles those providing litigation services to a percentage of anything recovered may give rise to particular objection on the ground that it poses a temptation to act in an unethical manner to achieve the maximum recovery…"

Costs negotiators are unregulated, often not legally qualified and in the present case not members of the Association of Law Costs Draftsman. In this case the Defendant’s solicitors did not remain in control of the litigation.

It was not disputed that the agreement did not comply with the Conditional Fee Agreement Regulations 2000.

Further, cost negotiators were not subject to the supervision of a qualified litigator (see above) nor statutory safeguards.

Master Hurst indicated that arrangements of the type entered into with the cost negotiators give rise to concerns that the question of costs may be pursued over vigorously and therefore disproportionately and in breach of the overriding objective. Master Hurst thought this a very real concern and was one of the reasons why the control of those appearing before the courts is so rigorously controlled.


  1. cost negotiators did not have a right of audience in relation to the detailed assessment hearing
  2. The terms of payment to cost negotiators were champertous

It is very likely that the decision will be Appealed.

In the meantime it appears that panel solicitors will have to retain control of files where the only outstanding question is one of costs. The solicitor (or other qualified litigator) will have to instruct the costs draftsman and remain responsible for the conduct of the detailed assessment (including considering the claim for costs and advising the client). The costs draftsman will have to be paid an hourly rate or a fixed amount for attending the detailed assessment. Provided these requirements are complied with, problems of rights of audience and champerty should be avoided.

The content of this article does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on in that way. Specific advice should be sought about your specific circumstances

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.