THE BARRISTERS whose fees in a case challenging the policy of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB) of not dealing with solicitors were reduced dramatically by the Taxing Master, will not be appealing his ruling, The Irish Timeshas learned.
Taxing Master Charles Moran described the €2.1 million total legal costs charged in the case as “revolting in the extreme”.
It is understood the barristers are claiming they did not suggest the fees and that the fees were submitted at the request of the solicitor, on the advice of the legal costs accountant, Connolly Lowe.
Legal sources said the barristers took on the case on a “no foal, no fee” basis, meaning they would not get paid if they lost, and they understood costs would be decided by the Taxing Master if they won. The Taxing Master provides an independent assessment of legal costs incurred by an individual or company involved in litigation.
The barristers told the solicitor they would accept whatever the Taxing Master ruled and had no intention now of appealing his ruling.
Neither Connolly Lowe nor the solicitors, Patrick Boland and Son, were available for comment yesterday.
Three of the counsel in the case, Harry Whelehan SC, Paul Gardiner SC and barrister Cormac McNamara were also not available for comment yesterday.
On Wednesday the fourth barrister, Dan Boland, told The Irish Times he did not recall what fee had been marked, but he normally would never mark a fee of €75,000, which was marked for his work in this case. It was reduced by the Taxing Master to €16,670.
He said on Wednesday he was unaware that the taxation had even taken place and was also unaware of the comments of the Taxing Master.
The services of legal costs accountants are regularly engaged by solicitors, especially if they take on work in an unfamiliar area. Patrick Boland and Son is a very well known company in the area of personal injuries.
This case began as a personal injuries case, where its client was injured at work.
However, when the Personal Injuries Assessment Board refused to deal with the solicitor, judicial review proceedings were brought challenging the board’s policy.
Patrick Boland and Son is not well-known in the area of judicial review. The proceedings were successful and costs were awarded against PIAB.
The Law Society was amicus curiae (friend of the court) in this case and paid its own costs. It had no comment to make on the case yesterday.
Patricia Byron, chief executive of PIAB, said the board had gone to the Taxing Master before to challenge costs.
“We got about a 50 per cent reduction,” she said. “One case was reduced from about €90,000 to about €35,000 and another from about €75,000 to about €30,000, but we had nothing on this scale before. This one stood out. In the interests of the tax-payer, we should challenge costs if we think they are too high.
“If the fees are justified we don’t mind paying, so long as I can stand straight in front of the taxpayer. No one minds paying a bill if they know what work has been done,” Ms Byron said.
“We are in favour of transparency. We are now able to copy everything to the client. That could be copied across all areas so that when bills arise there are no surprises.”
Business and employers group Ibec welcomed the Taxing Master’s ruling and said many professional fees, but particularly legal fees, must be reduced.
Ibec director general Danny McCoy said: “In serious cases of excessive pricing, the deterrents must be substantial. Where fees are grossly overstated there is a case for all entitlements to be forfeited.”