Theresa May's new Brexit department has spent tens of thousands of pounds on legal advice in the eight weeks since its creation, according to official figures.
Britain has yet to formally start talks to withdraw from the European Union, with the Prime Minister and Brexit Secretary David Davis coming under fire for revealing little detail about their plans to MPs.
But the Department for Exiting the European Union said its legal bill has so far reached an estimated £268,711 - an average of around £33,500 a week.
Officials are still assessing the total amount of taxpayers' cash required for legal advice over the next 12 months when the UK Government is expected to have invoked Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, thereby triggering what is predicted to be a complex two-year negotiation process.
The department came into existence in mid-July after a majority of voters backed Britain's withdrawal from the EU in the June 23 referendum.
Mrs May put Mr Davis into a position of power alongside fellow Brexiteers Liam Fox, now International Trade Secretary, and new Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson in a move viewed as an attempt to allow those who backed withdrawal to play a major role in finding solutions.
The PM was viewed as a reluctant Remain backer during the referendum campaign although she is now seeking to convince Leave voters that she will honour their desire for Brexit in full.
Brexit Minister David Jones, replying to a written parliamentary question from former Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg, said: "The department is currently assessing the overall requirement for legal advice and the associated funding requirement over the next 12 months.
"To date, the department has incurred an estimated total of £256,000 in fixed-fee legal advice with the Government legal department and a further £12,711 in relation to additional billed fees and disbursements.
"No spend has been incurred in relation to external legal firms."
Lib Dem MP Mr Clegg, who has returned to frontline politics as his party's EU spokesman, asked the Brexit department to reveal how much it has spent on internal and external legal advice, plus a prediction of future spending in the year ahead.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article