We at DeNovo are proud of our position as one of the most experienced and highly rated teams of legal costs consultants and costs lawyers in the UK. The DeNovo team specialises in all aspects of legal costs, be that solicitor-own client costs disputes, commercial inter partes costs disputes or costs claims arising out of personal (including medical and catastrophic) injury claims.
Denovo Legal Services is a provider of legal costs services. We are able to provide a full range of services including:
A costs lawyer is a specialist qualified lawyer who deals with the complex area of legal costs. Costs lawyers enjoy rights of audience on all matters relating to legal costs and are members of our professional body, the Association of Costs Lawyers. All are regulated by the Costs Lawyer Standards Board. Costs consultants (traditionally called ‘costs draftsmen’ or ‘costs draftspersons’) and costs lawyers, provide the same services; essentially to prepare and advance, or to defend, claims for legal costs.
Under the English legal system, the winning party to a legal dispute is normally awarded costs - a partial indemnity to be met by the losing party. A skilled costs lawyer or suitably experienced costs draftsperson or consultant may be engaged by either party (more typically, by solicitors acting for the winning or losing party), to act in connection with the claim for legal costs (its preparation and its progress). A costs lawyer or consultant may also be instructed to prepare a solicitor’s costs budget (Precedent Form H). A costs lawyer may also act for either side in disputes about legal costs between solicitors and their own clients (or former clients).
A Costs Lawyer is a legal costs specialist who has passed the relevant Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL) examination and is regulated by the Costs Lawyer Standards Board and the Legal Services Ombudsman. A costs draftsperson (costs draftsman, legal costs consultant) is someone who has not passed the ACL examination, but may be qualified in another way (through experience, or having qualified as a barrister or solicitor). There are many skilled and highly regarded costs draftspersons who are not costs lawyers. The most significant difference between a costs draftsperson and a costs lawyer is that the latter enjoys rights of audience, whereas at court hearings the former is treated, by concession, as if they are in the employ of the firm of solicitors instructing them (thus, properly instructed they enjoy temporary rights of audience).
We are a specialist costs consultancy. We work hard to maintain and to live up to our reputation as one of the UK’s top providers. All of our costs lawyers and consultants are graduates with a strong legal background. We spurn the ‘one size fits all’ approach, characteristic of many costs consultancies; as a result we provide clients – many of whom continue to instruct us after 20 years - with the certainty that their cases will be handled by the most appropriate, competent and experienced legal costs experts.
Education/admissions
Afqar is involved in the firm's diversity initiatives and a keen advocate for social mobility and opportunities for all.
Afqar was amongst the first in our profession become a regulated Costs Lawyer. He enjoys rights of audience in relation all costs proceedings.
Afqar is also an accredited training provider.
Experience and notable cases
Kuwait Airways Corporation (KAC) –v- Iraqi Airways Company (IAC) – Following the longest running commercial case in the history of the English courts I prepared KAC’s massive costs claim, one the largest ever to reach the doors of the Senior Courts Costs Office. Legal costs claim of >£40M.
Pharma patent litigation – I was instructed by a leading global law firm on behalf of the successful parties in patent infringement and revocation proceedings involving some of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies. Legal costs claim of >£5M.
Telecoms patent litigation – I was instructed by a top tier specialist firm of patent litigators to prepare various complex costs statements following trials and appeals involving some of the world’s largest technology corporations. Legal costs claim of >£10M.
High-profile costs claim following failed £100M civil recovery proceedings – instructed by a market leading international litigation team acting for a foreign citizen whose worldwide assets were subject of a civil recovery claim brought by the National Crime Agency (NCA). My team and I prepared a number of high value interrelated claims for costs on behalf of the successful party . Legal costs claim of >£5M.
Excalibur Ventures v Texas Keystone – The case generated several decisions of wider importance in the legal costs field (relating to security for costs, indemnity costs, and the availability of a non-party costs order against professional funders – a point on which the Association of Litigation Funders also intervened). I prepared the successful party's costs breakdowns and provided witness statements in support of its security for costs applications. Following the conclusion of the substantive litigation I prepared the defendant’s £20M> costs breakdown.
Challenge to remuneration and expenses of joint administrators – instructed by a market leading international litigation team: I was instructed to prepare a detailed challenge to the charges of a global financial consultancy and their advisers (including two high-profile international law firms), in connection with the administration of a UK energy supplier. The application for assessment of fees and expenses of >£5M under the Insolvency Act 1986 was the first significant challenge of its kind in 20 years.
Education
LLB (Hons) – University of London (1994)
LLM (Distinction) – University of East Anglia (2018)
PhD (law) - University of East Anglia (2024)
Professional and research interests: Costs law and practice, litigation funding, responsibility theory, vicarious liability, products liability, litigation practice, philosophical foundations of tort law. My doctoral thesis examined relationships between (pre-moral, pre-legal) outcome responsibility and strict tortious obligations of repair. Time permitting, future research output will address aspects of costs law and practice, third party litigation funding, as well as approaches to responsibility for harm caused by intelligent products (for ‘algorithmic accidents’).
