Meetings

Meetings are chargeable at the rate prescribed in the relevant detailed Table of Fees for “non-advocacy”.

That is where the respective fee tables allows for a time based fee to be paid to a solicitor, or solicitors clerk, where they are occupied in carrying out work for the client other than work for which a fee is otherwise prescribed.

A meeting is only chargeable where it is clear from the account that you have given or received material or provided substantive advice which progresses the matter or proceedings for which legal aid or ABWOR is available.

The narrative in the account entry should, by way of justification, demonstrate that:

• some development since the last contact with the client needed discussion or further instructions
• a course of action previously agreed with the client was not achievable, again requiring further instructions.

We cannot pay for a meeting where it is apparent from the account that a meeting was not at that stage either appropriate or necessary to progress the matter, but took place for example as a result of the client calling in at the office and no substantive advice was provided.

An adequate narrative is all the more important in supporting a claim for:

• a lengthy meeting
• a course of meetings over a short time.

Where there is a course of meetings over a short time, you should distinguish the purpose of each meeting to justify the additional expense, or again we may restrict the charges for any apparently unnecessary meetings.

The number and duration of meetings that are required can vary significantly from case to case depending on the circumstances.

There are a number of factors that can affect the frequency or duration of meetings including:

• the legal complexities of the litigation
• the factual complexity of the matter or the difficulty or novelty of the issues raised
• the volume of productions
• the duration of the proceedings
• where an interpreter is required
• the vulnerabilities of the client and, in particular, ability to understand the proceedings and the consequences of their actions.

This is not intended to be an exhaustive list.

Our role exercising our own knowledge and experience is to assess whether the time spent and number of meetings claimed was reasonable, for the type of case that is being assessed and whether a solicitor would reasonably have taken that time to perform the work due regard being had to economy.

The decision is a matter of balanced judgement rather than arithmetical calculation.

In assessing any charge it is important to remember that is not necessarily the time spent in the meeting which will always be payable, it is the time that has been reasonably spent.

In order that we can reach an informed view on the number and duration of meetings the account narrative must contain brief details as to the instructions taken, the advice given and how the case was progressed sufficient to justify the fee that has been claimed.

This does not mean that we expect, nor require, every word of the advice given or every detail on the law and procedure to be adopted – often advice on a particular procedure will be relatively standard – but you should provide a sufficient narrative of the personal circumstances of the client and the advice given on the case.

The longer the attendance claimed, the more detail should be provided.

In the majority of cases the information provided to support the charge will be sufficient to allow payment to be made.

However, where we are in any doubt as to the reasons for a meeting or where the narrative does not appear to justify the time engaged we may reduce the charge to a time that we consider reasonable and invite you to provide further information in support of the charge.

We will not pay for a meeting where it is apparent that a meeting was not necessary to advance the case.

Although business practices appear to have changed, at least by some firms, in recent years and greater use is now being made of other forms of communications with the client (ie email, letters, telephone, etc.) it is not uncommon for there to be a requirement for a number of meetings before a case outcome can successfully be achieved.

We will carefully consider the factors above when assessing the number of meetings, and the time that is being charged.

It is important that you provide a supporting narrative that is sufficient to clarify the purpose of the meeting with particular emphasis on matters arising since the previous meeting.

In some cases the need for a meeting may be clear (eg new information being made available, request for further hearing, etc.) but it is important to bear in mind that we can only allow charges where it is clear as to the purpose of the meeting and how this was necessary to advance the case, or if some material change or development has occurred and a brief but focussed narrative addressing those issues will help us reach an informed view on any charge.

In considering whether a meeting was necessary we may, depending on the circumstances, consider whether the communication could have been made through more economical means (eg when a telephone call or letter may suffice).

One example would be if the client has changed address and simply requires to pass this information on.

However, even in this situation it is recognised that there may be reasons why you have had a face to face meeting with the client and it is your responsibility to provide a narrative in support of any such charge.

It will, in any number of situations, be reasonable to meet with the client but the onus is always on you to say what the meeting was for.

Entries such as ‘meeting with client’, ‘advising of current situation’ or ‘receiving information’ are, in the absence of any additional detail, unhelpful and highly unlikely to provide any insight as to the information that has been imparted or received and lead to charges being disallowed pending further information being provided in support of the charge.

Where counsel are instructed they will be largely responsible for the preparation of the case albeit in conjunction with instructions provided from you and the client.

Counsel should manage the case and delegate responsibility to other members of the legal team wherever possible to avoid any duplication of effort.

We would not normally expect counsel to be in attendance at every meeting with the client and a higher number of meetings between solicitor and client is to be expected.

Similarly, it may often be reasonable to allow separate meetings (consultations) between solicitor and counsel to discuss legal procedures, tactics and strategy as to how to best manage, conduct and present the case in the absence of the client.

We will assess any such charges in line with the guidance above.

In cases of complexity or difficulty it may be necessary for you (and counsel) to consult with an expert that has been instructed.

A consultation should only be necessary where it is not possible to clarify issues by more economical means (eg email exchanges or short telephone calls).

Joint meetings between opposing sides whether it is the opponent in a civil case (who may or may not also be an assisted party), the Crown in a criminal case or the SCRA in a children’s case all serve broadly the same purpose. In some cases those meetings are specifically provided for in statute and should be used, where necessary, to:

• discuss settlement of the action
• agree so far as is possible, the matters which are not in dispute between them.

Early identification and, where possible, resolution of the relevant disputed issues is key to successful case management and efficient disposal of cases.

Where meetings are required by statute you must still provide a narrative in support of the meeting.

Similarly, if the meeting is not required by statute the supporting narrative should explain the purpose of the discussions and a brief note of the issues discussed and areas of agreement, if any, which have been reached.

In keeping with the guidance above the longer the attendance claimed, the more detail should be provided.