Heir to Banking Fortune Battles Law Firm Over $35 Million Legal Bill
Alberto Safra, son of the late Brazilian billionaire banker Joseph Safra, has taken a prominent City law firm to the English High Court over a staggering $35 million legal bill. The dispute follows a bitter, multi-billion-dollar inheritance battle over his father's $23 billion estate, one of the largest such feuds in history.
A Costly Legal War Over a Vast Fortune
Joseph Safra, once the world's richest banker, passed away in 2020. Alberto Safra claimed his father was suffering from cognitive impairment when he altered his will to disinherit him in 2019. The legal dispute, which involved complex cross-border issues and five high-stakes arbitrations at the London Court of International Arbitration, concluded with an amicable family settlement. However, the aftermath brought a new conflict: the invoice from US law firm WilmerHale.
WilmerHale billed Safra $35,343,213.96 (approximately £26.3 million) for work conducted between September 2022 and July 2024. Safra applied to the court to avoid paying the remaining $18.9 million, arguing the fees were excessive and improperly charged.
Exorbitant Hourly Rates and Questionable Billing Practices
A judgment handed down by Cost Judge Leonard revealed eye-watering details. The firm's hourly rates ranged from $1,400 to over $2,000, with the top partner's rate reaching $2,095 per hour by 2024. Associates billed between $715 and $1,055 per hour. On a single day in June 2023, the legal team billed 130.3 hours, costing Safra $162,312.
Judge Leonard noted, "I have not previously encountered a case in which such levels of costs accrued with such limited information being provided to the client." The bill included thousands for late-night secretarial support, office "takeaways" meals for the London team, and significant travel expenses, such as $11,367 for a single London-to-New York airfare.
Judge Rejects Law Firm's Arguments
WilmerHale argued that Safra had signed a contentious business agreement, which locks in fees as a contract and is harder to challenge. However, Judge Leonard ruled it was a standard retainer, not such an agreement, because the firm had "open-ended" power to unilaterally raise hourly rates. The firm increased rates twice during the retainer without properly notifying the client.
"[WilmerHale] charges are extremely high, and well outside any 'run of the mill' case. Even a small percentage overcharge would easily amount to a seven-figure sum," the judge stated. He refused the firm's request for Safra to pay the remaining $18.9 million and will now review the time records to determine what is reasonable and proportionate.
WilmerHale was contacted for comment but has not yet responded. Safra was represented by Quillon Law, with barristers Nicholas Bacon KC and Simon Teasdale of 4 New Square Chambers in the fee dispute. This case highlights the intense scrutiny of legal billing in high-value international disputes, setting a potential precedent for transparency and accountability in the legal industry.
