Government Brexit department spends £1.2m on legal advice in first quarter of 2018-19
Department for Exiting the EU turns to "more efficient and cheaper" government legal team
June 29, 2018 at 05:25 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The Department for Exiting the European Union (DExEU) spent £1.2m on legal advice from the Government Legal Department (GLD) in the first quarter of the 2018-19 financial year.
The figure was published yesterday (28 June) as part of the government department's transparency data report, which includes any spending over £25,000.
DExEU paid GLD, the government's principal legal advisers, £1,191,250 during the period from April to June 2018. The payment was made on 4 May.
A spokesperson for DExEU said: "We are working to unpick more than 40 years of legal harmonisation with the European Union. To do this effectively, we are making full use of the government's internal legal services. This is considerably more efficient and cheaper than going to the open market."
GLD is a non-ministerial department, meaning it is led by senior civil servants and does not operate under direct political oversight.
The report also shows DExEU spent £85,724 on "travel and subsistence" services from Clarity Travel Management during the quarter, as well as £95,704 on estates and facilities expenses.
Last year, Legal Week reported that DExEU spent £3.7m on legal costs during the last financial year, including more than £1.2m on Brexit-related litigation. Legal costs represented DExEU's second most significant area of spending, behind staff costs of £14m for the year ending 31 March 2017.
Litigation costs represented almost a third of the department's total legal spend during the year, with the bulk of the £1.2m in litigation costs relating to the high-profile Article 50 legal challenge led by investment manager Gina Miller. The remainder of the litigation costs (£78,000) related to Article 127 litigation, which concerns Britain's membership of the European Economic Area.
The two legal challenges cost the department £345,000 in legal fees, £383,000 in counsel fees and disbursements, and £493,000 in court-ordered third-party litigation costs.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllClifford Chance Under Fire for Human Rights Assessment of Saudi Arabia World Cup Bid
5 minute readThe Week in Data Nov. 7: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
Trump Win Ignites Global Legal Market: Lawyers Prepare for High Demand & Uncertainty
Netflix Offices Raided by Authorities in Paris and Amsterdam
Trending Stories
- 1Cars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
- 2How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 3DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 4GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 5Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250