Friday, August 8, 2025
25.8 C
London

£700k legal fees challenge thrown out by court

Costs recovery lawyers suffer blow in failed bid to challenge £700k in legal invoices

A London court has dismissed an attempt to challenge almost £700,000 in legal fees issued by top law firm Howard Kennedy LLP, delivering a decisive victory for the firm. In a detailed ruling in Mehta v Howard Kennedy LLP, Costs Judge Whalan found the firm’s invoices were valid statutory bills, not subject to court assessment under the Solicitors Act.

Vishal Mehta, represented by costs challenge firm checkmylegalfees.com, sought to have outstanding invoices assessed. The claim marked a significant departure from the firm’s usual low-value personal injury cases, involving instead high-stakes litigation linked to an alleged US$1 billion fraud.

Mehta instructed Howard Kennedy in 2022, but the firm ended the retainer 11 months later. Over that time, 24 invoices totalling more than £3.1 million were issued. Thirteen had been paid more than 12 months before Mehta brought the challenge — a key point for the court.

Embed from Getty Images

Howard Kennedy argued those paid invoices were statutory bills, final for each period and not subject to assessment. The firm also maintained that the remaining unpaid invoices were clearly detailed, meeting the statutory requirements. Judge Whalan agreed, noting the invoices were regular, itemised, and sufficiently detailed to inform Mehta of his accumulating liability.

Mehta’s legal team contended that the bills were not final but instead a single entire bill disguised as multiple interim ones. They pointed to language in the retainer referencing “value” and “importance” to support their claim. However, the judge rejected this argument, affirming the invoices’ clarity and the firm’s contractual right to issue final statute bills.

Further, Mehta argued the retainer was a “contentious business agreement” under the Solicitors Act 1974, which would allow the court to assess its fairness and reasonableness. Again, the judge rejected this, concluding no such entitlement existed and no court assessment was required.

Lastly, Mehta attempted to argue that “special circumstances” warranted judicial scrutiny, given the fees far exceeded original estimates. Judge Whalan dismissed this too, citing Mehta’s awareness of the invoices, the detailed breakdowns provided, and the fact he had already paid approximately 80% of the total billed.

This ruling closes another chapter in the growing scrutiny of law firm billing, especially as firms like checkmylegalfees.com continue to probe high-value costs in larger commercial disputes. For now, Howard Kennedy stands vindicated in its billing practices, with the court confirming its position.

Hot this week

Administrators recover just 2% of Pure Legal’s £30m claims book

Creditors face heavy losses as administrators recover just £491k from the failed Pure Legal claims book

Mass litigation ‘could cost UK economy £18bn’, warns new report

Collective litigation boom may deter investment and harm growth sectors, warns ECIPE study

Pérez-llorca and Gómez-Pinzón agree historic merger to enter Colombian market

Pérez-llorca merges with Gómez-Pinzón, forming a powerhouse in Colombia and Latin America

Ex-Dechert lawyer loses seven-figure injury claim over office door handle strike

Judge rules office fire door and handle not “equipment” under Employer’s Liability Act

Make e-wills legal, abolish obsolete rules, law commission tells government

Commission urges overhaul of Victorian wills law to reflect modern tech and protect vulnerable people

Topics

AI set to invade UK courts as government pushes full justice system overhaul

Government unveils sweeping AI plan to transform courts, staff, and case administration

AI is killing Biglaw jobs but it’s great news for malpractice lawyers, says Andrew Yang

Andrew Yang says AI is replacing biglaw juniors—sparking fears of malpractice, not progress.

Barrister busted for quoting fake court cases in shocking legal scandal

Sarah Forey and Haringey Law Centre face a damning high court rebuke after inventing legal precedents.

Is your legal assistant about to be replaced by a robot?

Legal AI tools threaten to disrupt paralegal roles, but experts say humans are far from obsolete.

Fax out, email in: Civil rule reform targets modernised service

Civil Procedure Rule Committee proposes barring solicitors from rejecting email service without a reason

Solicitors and insurers near deal on ‘unbundled services’ definition

Finalised definition of unbundled legal services expected this summer to boost clarity

UK government moves to rein in SEP litigation costs with new IPEC track

UK to consult on new IPEC track to fairly price standard-essential patents amid legal concerns

Judge adds own colourful diagram in high-stakes competition case

Sir Marcus Smith J defends originality with colourful sketch amid KC-stacked court battle
spot_img

Related Articles

Popular Categories

spot_imgspot_img