---
title: "The Cost of Litigation: How a Solicitor-Advocate Can Help Control Legal Costs - Chris Clayton - Commercial & Property Dispute Lawyer in the UK"
description: "For business owners, directors and shareholders who need clarity and a workable outcome. Not years of litigation and spiralling legal costs."
url: "https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/blog/the-cost-of-litigation-how-a-solicitor-advocate-can-help-control-legal-costs"
date: "2026-11-11T07:03:48+00:00"
language: "en-GB"
---

![Advising a client as to options in litigation ](//rmclayton.b-cdn.net/images/Advising%20in%20responding%20to%20a%20claim.png)#  The Cost of Litigation: How a Solicitor-Advocate Can Help Control Legal Costs

  [General](https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/blog)    05 November 2026

- [ ](https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rmclayton.co.uk%2Fblog%2Fthe-cost-of-litigation-how-a-solicitor-advocate-can-help-control-legal-costs "Facebook")
- [ ](https://twitter.com/share?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rmclayton.co.uk%2Fblog%2Fthe-cost-of-litigation-how-a-solicitor-advocate-can-help-control-legal-costs&text=The+Cost+of+Litigation%3A+How+a+Solicitor-Advocate+Can+Help+Control+Legal+Costs "X (formerly Twitter)")
- [ ](https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rmclayton.co.uk%2Fblog%2Fthe-cost-of-litigation-how-a-solicitor-advocate-can-help-control-legal-costs&title=The+Cost+of+Litigation%3A+How+a+Solicitor-Advocate+Can+Help+Control+Legal+Costs "LinkedIn")

The cost of litigation is one of the biggest concerns for anyone facing a commercial or property dispute. The financial risk includes not only your own legal fees, but also the possibility of paying towards your opponent's costs if you lose.

Experienced representation matters. Effective litigation does not always require a large legal team or multiple lawyers preparing for and attending the same hearing.

At RM Clayton, clients deal directly with me. As a [solicitor-advocate](https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/blog/the-solicitor-advocate-what-it-means-for-your-case), I can undertake the preparation, advice, drafting and advocacy myself where appropriate, avoiding some of the additional work involved in instructing a separate advocate.

The objective is not to provide cheap legal services. It is to deliver experienced, specialist representation without unnecessary layers of cost.

### Discuss your commercial or property dispute

For advice on your options, likely costs and litigation risks, contact Chris Clayton:

**Telephone: [07368 648 312](tel:07368648312)**
**Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.**

## Two successful applications. Substantially different costs.

Two recent contested applications illustrate the practical difference this approach can make.

### An application to set aside a judgment

I represented a client applying to [set aside a judgment](https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/blog/setting-aside-a-default-judgment-can-you-still-defend-the-claim). The application was successful.

My client's costs were approximately £3,500, including VAT. Those costs were claimed and recovered.

The opposing party claimed approximately £14,000, including VAT.

### An application to introduce an additional party

I represented a client opposing an application to bring an additional party into existing court proceedings. We successfully opposed the application.

My client's costs were approximately £5,000, including VAT. Again, those costs were claimed and recovered.

The opposing party claimed approximately £24,000, including VAT.

### Why the comparison mattered

These were successful outcomes on the applications, rather than statements about the final outcome of the wider proceedings.

In both applications, my clients succeeded, their costs were substantially lower than the opposing costs claims, and they recovered their costs.

You can't buy a win simply by spending more money on the same issue. Having succeeded, the direct comparison helped me justify recovery. It provided a concrete reference point: what each side was claiming for dealing with the same application.

That does not mean the work required on each side was identical. Different parties can face different evidential burdens and procedural responsibilities. Nor does the difference alone establish that the higher claim was unreasonable.

But the comparison was useful. When a judge is considering the propionate costs payable by one party to the other, the stark difference between the two claims for costs leaves an impression and can influence how the judge exercises their discretion.

## Why controlling legal costs matters whether you win or lose

There are no guarantees in litigation. Strong evidence, experienced representation and a carefully considered strategy cannot eliminate the risk of an unsuccessful outcome.

Depending on the proceedings and the applicable costs rules, losing may mean paying your own lawyers' fees and disbursements, including court and expert fees, as well as contributing towards your opponent's costs. A party facing a claim or counterclaim may also have to pay damages or meet another financial award.

Controlling your own expenditure therefore matters whichever way the decision goes.

If you win, you want the result without spending more than the case reasonably requires. You want to ensure that the margin between fees incurred and paid for and what you can recover is as narrow as possible. If you lose, you do not want unnecessary layers of work and expenditure to have increased the financial damage.

There was another important aspect to the comparison in these two applications.

Had my clients lost, I would have expected to use the same comparison to seek significant reductions in the costs claimed against them. I could point to the preparation and advocacy I had undertaken and the cost of doing that work when challenging whether the opposing claim was justified.

That would have been an argument to put to the court, not a guaranteed reduction. Differences in the work required would still matter. Spending less on your own representation does not automatically reduce your liability for an opponent's costs.

Nevertheless, a clear understanding of the necessary work and its cost matters both when seeking recovery and when scrutinising a claim against your client.

## How a solicitor-advocate can avoid additional layers of cost

I qualified as a solicitor-advocate with higher rights of audience in civil proceedings in 2020. This enables me to undertake advocacy personally in the higher courts, as well as representing clients in other appropriate hearings.

In both applications described above, my clients' costs included no counsel's fees. Crucially, there was also no separate layer of solicitor time spent instructing external counsel, and no dual attendance by a solicitor and barrister at the hearing.

I undertook the preparation and advocacy myself.

### The benefit is continuity—not simply avoiding a barrister's fee

Barristers often provide excellent value. Instructing specialist counsel can be the right decision, particularly where a case requires particular expertise or additional capacity. My point is not that I save the expense of a barrister.

The potential additional expense lies partly in the work surrounding that instruction: preparing instructions, transferring knowledge of the case, liaising with counsel, considering advice or drafting and attending conferences or hearings together.

Those steps may be justified. But where one experienced solicitor-advocate can undertake the preparation, advice, drafting and advocacy, some of them can be avoided.

The lawyer who knows the documents and has developed the strategy is also the lawyer presenting the arguments in court.

The advantage is having the flexibility to choose the right arrangement for the case, rather than automatically involving a separate advocate.

## Specialist experience with direct access to your solicitor

The size of a firm does not tell you who will handle your case or how much experience that person has.

Before establishing RM Clayton, I headed a dispute resolution department and developed a practice dealing with complex commercial and property litigation.

My work includes [director and shareholder disputes](https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/blog/director-and-shareholder-disputes-what-the-court-can-actually-do), [contractual claims](https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/blog/how-do-you-handle-a-breach-of-contract), [partnership disputes](https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/blog/partnership-disputes-where-the-agreement-ends), [joint venture disputes](https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/blog/property-joint-ventures-why-theyre-harder-than-they-look) professional negligence and property disputes. I am also an accredited mediator.

At RM Clayton, clients deal directly with me, from the initial assessment and development of strategy through to advocacy where appropriate.

That continuity means clear responsibility for the case and direct access to the person advising on the key decisions.

## A streamlined practice with lower overheads

Larger firms can offer important benefits where a dispute requires extensive teams or several specialist disciplines. Not every case needs that infrastructure.

RM Clayton operates remotely, without expensive city-centre offices, large teams of staff or multiple layers of management.

This keeps overheads comparatively low and enables me to deliver specialist representation through a more streamlined structure.

Technology supports that approach. I use legal systems to assist with case management, document organisation, research, drafting and administration, helping reduce time spent on routine processes and keeping information accessible.

Technology supports my professional judgement; it does not replace it. I remain responsible for the advice, strategy and work undertaken on the client's behalf.

## Cost-effective litigation is about more than the hourly rate

The lowest hourly rate does not necessarily produce the lowest overall bill. Nor does a premium rate guarantee a successful outcome.

The more useful questions are what work the case requires, who will do it and how that work will advance the client's interests.

Experience can help identify the decisive issues early, select an appropriate strategy and avoid unnecessary procedural disputes. But even a strong legal case needs a commercial assessment.

A successful court outcome is not necessarily a successful financial outcome. The costs of pursuing a claim may consume much of its value, particularly if recovery of those costs is limited or the opponent cannot pay.

A proportionate approach therefore involves:

- Assessing the merits and the evidence at an early stage.
- Identifying the issues that will determine the dispute.
- Considering likely expenditure alongside the value and importance of the outcome.
- Reviewing settlement opportunities and the cost-benefit position as the case develops.
- Giving clear advice when the likely expenditure may outweigh the potential benefit.

Sometimes robust litigation is necessary to protect a client's position. Sometimes negotiation, mediation or settlement offers the better outcome.

The right strategy depends on the dispute, the client's objectives and the financial risk—not simply on whether a legal argument is available.

## The aim: effective, proportionate litigation

I established RM Clayton to combine specialist experience, direct client access, solicitor-advocacy and modern technology in a practice designed to operate efficiently.

That does not eliminate litigation risk or mean that every matter will cost less than it would elsewhere.

It does give clients an alternative to automatically paying for additional layers of people, processes and overheads where their case does not need them.

The two applications illustrate the point: you do not always need a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Whether bringing a claim or defending one, the objective is the same: to achieve the best reasonable outcome at a cost proportionate to what is at stake.

That's not cheap litigation.

That's effective, cost-efficient litigation.

## Speak to RM Clayton about your dispute

If you are facing a commercial or property dispute, [contact me](https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/contact) to discuss your options, the merits of your position and the likely costs and risks involved.

**Chris Clayton**
Solicitor-Advocate (Civil) | Director
RM Clayton Limited

**Telephone: [07368 648 312](tel:07368648312)**
**Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.**

## Schema

```json
{
    "@context": "https://schema.org",
    "@type": "BreadcrumbList",
    "itemListElement": [
        {
            "@type": "ListItem",
            "position": 1,
            "name": "Home",
            "item": "https://www.rmclayton.co.uk"
        },
        {
            "@type": "ListItem",
            "position": 2,
            "name": "Blog",
            "item": "https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/blog"
        },
        {
            "@type": "ListItem",
            "position": 3,
            "name": "The Cost of Litigation: How a Solicitor-Advocate Can Help Control Legal Costs",
            "item": "https://www.rmclayton.co.uk/blog/the-cost-of-litigation-how-a-solicitor-advocate-can-help-control-legal-costs.md"
        }
    ]
}
```