Litigation is expensive. Here’s how you can reduce costs

Litigation can be costly, but not every cost is unavoidable. Some costs are driven by the nature of the dispute, the conduct of the opposing party, the complexity of the evidence or the procedures required by the court. Other costs are created by the way instructions are given, documents are managed and decisions are made during the litigation process.

As part of Barnard’s Promise to Clients, our professionals are required to be clear about costs. That includes the immediate costs that can be anticipated, as well as the costs that may be difficult to predict at the start of a matter. Litigation involves moving parts. Once a matter is before court, or where advocates, experts, witnesses and opposing parties are involved, the attorney’s ability to control timing and cost becomes more limited.

That makes it even more important to manage the parts of the process that can be controlled.

One of the most effective ways to reduce unnecessary costs is to give complete instructions from the start. An attorney cannot assess a dispute properly where the facts arrive in fragments over several weeks. A clear summary of what happened, who was involved, what documents exist, what outcome is required and what deadlines apply will usually make the first consultation more productive.

Documents should also be organised properly. Litigation often relies on recorded e-mails, agreements, WhatsApp messages, invoices, payment records, meeting notes, notices and prior correspondence. Sending documents one by one, without context, usually increases the time needed to understand the matter. A dated file, a short index and a brief explanation of why each document is relevant can reduce the time spent piecing the dispute together.

Clients should also think carefully before sending multiple e-mails on the same issue. Several short messages sent over the course of a day may each require attention, consideration and response. Where possible, it is usually more efficient to consolidate questions and instructions into one clear message. The same applies to telephone calls. Calls are often necessary, especially where strategy or urgency is involved, but they are most useful when the client has prepared the points that need to be discussed.

Legal costs can also increase where objectives change without proper discussion. A client may begin by wanting settlement, then decide to litigate aggressively, then return to settlement once costs have increased. Strategy can change as facts develop but the attorney should understand the client’s commercial objective as early as possible. Sometimes the best legal step is not the best commercial step.

Clients can help control costs by focusing on what is relevant. Litigation is not always the right forum to address every historical frustration between the parties. The attorney’s task is to identify the facts and documents that advance the case. Time spent on side issues may increase costs without improving the client’s position.

It is also important to respond timeously. Court processes run on deadlines. Late instructions may require urgent work, additional correspondence, postponements or condonation applications. These steps can often be avoided when clients respond promptly and provide the requested information in full.

A good litigation process depends on a working partnership between attorney and client. The attorney must be clear about what costs can be anticipated and where uncertainty may arise. The client can assist by giving complete instructions, organising documents, consolidating questions and making decisions with the broader strategy in mind.

Litigation may remain expensive, but careful preparation and disciplined communication can help reduce the costs that are within the client’s control.