The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal by 35 Queen’s University Belfast law graduates seeking increases in legal fees allowed following their earlier challenge to Law Society examination rules.
The underlying proceedings concerned Regulation 15 of the Law Society Regulations 1991. The graduates argued that they should receive the same exemption from part of the Law Society’s final examination as law graduates of specified universities in the State. They ultimately secured a declaration that the regulation excluding Queen’s graduates was invalid as discriminatory and contrary to European law.
The later dispute concerned how much of their legal costs the Law Society was required to pay. Taxing Master Moran had reduced several amounts claimed. A solicitor’s High Court instruction fee of £210,000 was reduced to £76,000. Senior counsel’s High Court brief fee, marked at £47,500, was initially reduced to £12,600, while a £6,000 daily refresher was reduced to £3,150. A £25,000 Supreme Court brief fee was reduced to £10,000.
On review, the High Court increased senior counsel’s High Court brief fee to £21,000 but otherwise left the Taxing Master’s figures unchanged. The graduates appealed that decision.
Mrs Justice McGuinness said the relevant legal test required more than showing that the Taxing Master had made an error. The court also had to be satisfied that the taxation decision was unjust.
The Supreme Court found no basis to disturb the £76,000 solicitor’s fee, £3,150 daily refreshers or £10,000 Supreme Court brief fee. It also considered the £21,000 High Court brief fee reasonable, particularly given that costs had only been awarded for an eight-day hearing and on the European law issue.
The appeal was therefore dismissed. The court also strongly criticised allegations made in submissions suggesting the High Court judge had been compromised because counsel for the Law Society was his wife, noting that the judge had expressly offered to transfer the case and no objection had been raised at the time.