Costs specialist becomes ABS

Just Costs, the largest law firm specialising in costs-related work, has become an ABS. It is the first firm of its kind to join the growing ranks of ABSs, which currently number 74.

Just Costs Limited has nearly 100 staff in Manchester, London and Chesterfield. Its turnover has risen from £1.1m in 2006 to £5.1m in 2012.

The move means that non-solicitor Nick McDonnell can be appointed director at Just Costs, along with other costs draftsmen.

Managing director Paul Shenton, a qualified barrister and solicitor, said the firm would use its ABS status to help it grow as well as rewarding non-lawyer staff members.

“We are an innovative business, committed to being at the forefront of change,” Shenton said. “As an ABS, we will drive the business forward and actively explore the opportunities available to us.”

Just Costs said it had set up a working committee to look at the business’ future direction as an ABS.

Solicitor Christopher Murphy also becomes a director and the firm’s COLP, while Shirley Rothel, the firm’s finance manager, becomes its COFA.

In a separate development, Red Legal, one of the first licensed conveyancing firms to become an ABS, has been found by the Patents County Court to have infringed the trade mark of Redd Solicitors, which specialises in intellectual property.

In Redd Solicitors v Red Legal and Martin Crighton [2012] EWPCC 54, Judge Birss QC said the law firm had not only registered the word ‘REDD’ in respect of legal services, but also the word ‘RED’.

He said that REDD had been registered as a community trade mark and RED as a UK trade mark.

Red Legal, which has offices in Northampton, Milton Keynes, Leicester and Bedford, was set up by solicitor Martin Crighton and Jonathan Smith.

The court heard that it “simply never occurred to them” to make checks at the UK Intellectual Property Office when they chose the name.

Judge Birss said the name ‘Red Legal’ was chosen, with the idea that the licensed conveyancing firm would help to cut the ‘red tape’ for people moving home or changing their mortgage.

“Before Red Legal started trading Mr Smith and Mr Crighton undertook some searches. They checked the records at Companies House to see if the name Red Legal Ltd was already in use (it was not) and they typed ‘red legal’ into the Google search engine and into the Yell.com business register website.

“Although both Mr Smith and Mr Crighton were aware of the existence of intellectual property law and trade marks in the abstract, neither had been on the UK Intellectual Property Office website nor the Community Trade Mark office website.

“They were unaware of the existence of the claimant and its REDD mark. They were also unaware of any other legal business in the UK trading under the name RED.”

Judge Birss said the ‘key points’ in the case were that “the services are the same, the mark and the sign are conceptually close and, in the context of legal services, practically aurally identical”.

He said the strongest points in Red Legal’s favour were that legal services are selected by consumers “with care” and that the colour red (and the word itself) did not have “a high degree” of distinctiveness.

“Both points will tend to reduce a likelihood of confusion between different entities using similar signs, the first point particularly in relation to legal services, but I do not think either point alone or together are strong enough to eliminate a likelihood of confusion in this case.”

Judge Birss ruled that Red Legal had infringed the community trade mark REDD. However he allowed a locality defence to the claim of infringement of the UK registered RED, in respect of the county of Northamptonshire.