Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon

United Kingdom > London Bar > Costs > Law firm and leading lawyer rankings



Index of tables

  1. Costs - Leading sets
  2. Leading Silks
  3. 2018 Silks
  4. 2019 Silks
  5. Leading Juniors

Leading Silks

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3

2018 Silks

  1. 1

2019 Silks

  1. 1

Leading Juniors

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4

'Quite simply the number one costs set', 4 New Square is the 'first place to look for competent costs counsel'. Its members are often instructed in high-profile cases, including those in the appellate courts. In recent examples, Robert Marven QC acted for the successful claimant in Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd, a Supreme Court appeal that considered LASPO transitional provisions, and Roger Mallalieu represented the successful claimant in Tuson v Murphy, a Court of Appeal case concerning a costs penalty on a dishonest claimant which had accepted a Part 36 offer. In a 14-day hearing in the Central London County Court, Pippa Manby acted for costs draftsmen in Jagjit Bamrah v (1) Gempride Limited and (2) Lawlords of London Limited, an appeal relating to a misconduct application made against a solicitor.  

Hailsham Chambers is 'one of the foremost costs sets'; it has 'built a formidable team that has strength in depth' and 'the barristers are all technically gifted and approachable'. Alexander Hutton QC acted for the defendant NHS Trusts in Kai Surrey v Barnet & Chase Farm NHS Trust and others, a closely followed Court of Appeal case where legal aid had been changed to a conditional fee agreement (CFA) and after the event insurance (ATE) before recoverability was abolished from 1 April 2013. Elsewhere, Alice Nash successfully represented the claimant in Aviva Wiser v Lester Wilson where the defendant sought an unusual costs order. 

Well-regarded set 39 Essex Chambers has broad expertise in costs litigation. Among Vikram Sachdeva QC's recent caseload was his work in Jolyon Maugham QC v Uber London Ltd, where he was instructed to obtain a Protective Costs Order against Uber, while Judith Ayling advised on costs issues and likely costs recovery in two high-value personal injury claims.

Temple Garden Chambers is recognised for costs litigation, an area in which a number of its barristers have strong practices. Simon Browne QC acted in Frost & Ors v MGN, a Supreme Court challenge by Mirror Group Newspapers to the payment of additional liabilities. In Wedlake Bell LLP v Lord Magan of Castletown, Shaman Kapoor represented the defendant in resisting a claim for recovery of costs; the case centred on the retainer and a dispute as to whether the defendant was the claimant’s client.

Interview with...

Law firm partners and practice heads explain how their firms are adapting to clients' changing needs

GC Diversity and Inclusion Report

In partnership with...

International comparative guides

Giving the in-house community greater insight to the law and regulations in different jurisdictions.

Select Practice Area

Press releases

The latest news direct from law firms. If you would like to submit press releases for your firm, send an email request to

Legal Developments in the UK

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • Court of Justice rules on source of income for Derivative Residence applications

    On 2 October 2019, the Court of Justice delivered its judgment in Bajratari v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Directive 2004/38/EC) Case C-93/18 which concerns Chen applications and the source of funds for self-sufficiency. 
  • End of the ‘centre of life test’ in Surinder Singh cases?

    In the recent case of  ZA (Reg 9. EEA Regs; abuse of rights) Afghanistan   [2019] UKUT 281 (IAC ), the Upper Tribunal found that there is no basis in EU law for the centre of life test, as set out in Regulation 9(3)(a) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 (the “Regulations”). It further found that it is not to be applied when Judges assess  Surinder Singh  cases that appear before them.
  • Terms of employment as a sole representative

    In this article we examine the working arrangements of sole representatives, looking at the terms and conditions of employment that the Home Office will expect a sole representative to have in order to qualify as a representative of an overseas business.  
  • Can Sole Representatives Be Shareholders?

    The Immigration Rules require that an applicant for a  sole representative visa  is not “a  majority shareholder in the overseas business”.
  • Immigration Skills Charge - A Guide for Employers

    As a Sponsor, you may be required to pay the Immigration Skills Charge (ISC) each time you sponsor a migrant in the  Tier 2 General  or  Intra-Company Transfer (ICT) Long-term Staff  subcategory.
  • 5 FAQS about paragraph 320(11)

    In applications for entry clearance where the applicant has a negative immigration history in the UK, the application may be refused under the general grounds for refusal, which are found in part 9 of the Immigration Rules. Where an applicant has  ‘previously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Immigration Rules’,  the application could be refused under paragraph 320(11). In this post we look at five frequently asked questions about paragraph 320(11). 
  • Multiple nationality and multiple citizenship (including dual nationality and dual citizenship)

    British nationality law permits multiple nationality and multiple citizenship, including dual nationality and dual citizenship.
  • Applying for Indefinite Leave to Remain in the Exceptional Talent or Promise Category

    The  Exceptional Talent  and Exceptional Promise categories are for individuals who are recognised leaders or emerging leaders in their field of expertise. There are a number of endorsing bodies for lots of different fields of work, including  artists and musicians ,  architects ,  digital experts ,  scientists  and  academics . While there isn’t an endorsing body for every expert, the growing list means that many individuals could enjoy the flexibility that this category has to offer. 

    Syedur Rahmanconsiders the factors that determine when civil proceedings can go ahead before,or at the same time as, criminal proceedings relating to the same circumstances.
  • Rights of appeal after the Immigration Act 2014

    The Immigration Act 2014 (“the 2014 Act”) reduced the circumstances in which the refusal of an immigration application will give rise to a right of appeal. The  explanatory notes  to the 2014 Act state that the Act was intended to restructure rights of appeal to the Immigration Tribunal. Previously, a right of appeal to the Immigration Tribunal existed against any of the 14 different immigration decisions listed in s.82 of the  Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002  (“the 2002 Act”). As explained below, whether or not the refusal of an immigration application currently generates a right of appeal depends on the subject matter of the application rather than its categorisation.

Press Releases in the UK

The latest news direct from law firms. If you would like to submit press releases for your firm, send an email request to