The Legal Aid Agency has largely cleared its backlog, with faster processing times now in place. This update explains what it means for billing, cashflow and Legal Aid costs recovery.

ixed Recoverable Costs, FRC UK explained, including tables, bands and key exceptions. Learn how much can be recovered and when FRC is disputed or applied incorrectly.

Recent Legal Aid updates affect CCMS billing, contingency work and disbursement claims. This guide explains what has changed, the risks for solicitors, and how to protect costs recovery.

The SCCO has issued new guidance introducing the Document Upload Centre (DUC) for uploading supporting papers in Court of Protection costs bills. The guidance takes effect from 20 April 2026.

Points of Dispute are the formal response served by a paying party to challenge a bill of costs in detailed assessment proceedings. This guide explains CPR Part 47 requirements, time limits and common grounds of dispute.

Detailed assessment of costs determines the amount of legal costs recoverable following litigation. This guide explains the CPR Part 47 process, including bills of costs, Points of Dispute, proportionality challenges and provisional assessment.

Court of Appeal guidance in Attersley v UK Insurance Ltd on the costs consequences of late acceptance of Part 36 offers and the interaction with fixed recoverable costs.

A practical reference guide to the Intermediate Track costs table (CPR 45.50), including Stages S1–S16, Band 1–4 figures, and trial advocacy fee rules.

A practical guide to Intermediate Track Fixed Recoverable Costs including Band 1–4 figures, costs tables and trial advocacy fees. Learn how complexity band allocation affects recoverable costs in claims between £25,000 and £100,000.

The Intermediate Track has transformed litigation costs for claims between £25,000 and £100,000. Recoverable costs now depend on the court’s allocation of a case to one of four complexity bands — a decision that can significantly affect financial exposure. Understanding how banding works, and how parties argue for higher or lower classifications, is essential for protecting recoverability and managing costs risk.

Electronic bills of costs require clear phase and task structure to align with Precedent H and support effective detailed assessment. This guide explains preparation, analysis and common issues in electronic bills.

Expert fees are a major disbursement risk in litigation. This guide explains how paying parties challenge necessity, proportionality, scope and duplication to reduce expert costs at detailed assessment.

Counsel’s fees are a major driver of costs exposure. This guide explains how paying parties challenge leading counsel, duplication, and disproportionate advocacy costs at detailed assessment using proportionality and delegation principles.

Fixed recoverable costs after Part 36 settlement remain a key battleground in police litigation. This Senior Courts Costs Office decision clarifies when FRC applies, when intentional tort claims escape the regime, and how paying parties can use procedural timing to reduce exposure at detailed assessment.

Delegation challenges reduce costs by attacking senior fee earner time, duplication and grade mismatches at detailed assessment.

Proportionality is a key tool for paying parties to reduce a bill of costs through global assessment, delegation analysis and evidence-based challenges.

he CCMS Secure Browser introduces workflow risks that can delay Legal Aid claims and affect cashflow. Structured billing processes are essential to protect recovery.

Paying parties can significantly reduce costs by challenging hourly rates, proportionality and scope through structured Points of Dispute and detailed assessment strategy.

When will a court award indemnity costs and how does that affect detailed assessment? A practical guide to conduct, risk, and recoverability in costs disputes.

When can litigation costs become irrecoverable? The answer often lies not in the amount claimed, but in how the work was conducted, by whom, and under what authority. This article explains how conduct of litigation, delegation, supervision, and regulatory compliance can affect recoverability at detailed assessment — and why firms should address these risks long before a costs dispute arises.