Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » Conditional Fee Agreements
IS A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT UNENFORCEABLE IF THE SOLICITOR BREACHES THE CODE OF CONDUCT? MUCH TO THINK ABOUT?

IS A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT UNENFORCEABLE IF THE SOLICITOR BREACHES THE CODE OF CONDUCT? MUCH TO THINK ABOUT?

December 16, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs

The judgment of Mr Justice Trower in Winros Partnership v Global Energy Horizons Corporation [2021] EWHC 3410 (Ch) gives much for  lawyers to think about.  Here I want to concentrate on one element  of that judgment- does a failure to…

WHEN CAN A COURT TAKE ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES  UNDER A CFA INTO ACCOUNT IN THE AWARD OF DAMAGES?

WHEN CAN A COURT TAKE ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES UNDER A CFA INTO ACCOUNT IN THE AWARD OF DAMAGES?

October 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

Another aspect of the Court of Appeal judgment in Hirachand v Hirachand & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 1498 was the Court of Appeal’s consideration of whether it was appropriate for the judge to take into account liabilities for costs under a…

SOLICITORS AND FUNDERS ENTITLED TO TERMINATE THEIR AGREEMENT: FORMER CLIENTS LIABLE TO PAY COSTS: WHEN LITIGATION GOES AWRY

SOLICITORS AND FUNDERS ENTITLED TO TERMINATE THEIR AGREEMENT: FORMER CLIENTS LIABLE TO PAY COSTS: WHEN LITIGATION GOES AWRY

August 13, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conditional Fee Agreements, Professional negligence,

The judgment of HHJ Cadwallader in Escalate Law Ltd & Anor v Kennedy & Anor [2021] EWHC 2232 (Ch) is an example of legal funders and solicitors falling out with their clients.  The  judge upheld the decision to withdraw from…

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT WAS NOT UNFAIR OR UNREASONABLE: SENIOR COURT COSTS OFFICE DECISION TODAY

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT WAS NOT UNFAIR OR UNREASONABLE: SENIOR COURT COSTS OFFICE DECISION TODAY

June 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Uncategorized

In Acupay System LLC v Stephenson Harwood LLP [2021] EWHC B11 (Costs) Costs Judge Leonard rejected a claimant’s argument that a conditional fee agreement it had entered into with a solicitor was unfair, unreasonable and not supported by consideration. (There…

THE DANGERS OF WORKING UNDER A DBA: WHEN DOES RIGHT TO PAYMENT ARISE? WAS THE DBA ENFORCEABLE: ISSUES CONSIDERED BY THE HIGH COURT

THE DANGERS OF WORKING UNDER A DBA: WHEN DOES RIGHT TO PAYMENT ARISE? WAS THE DBA ENFORCEABLE: ISSUES CONSIDERED BY THE HIGH COURT

April 30, 2021 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In  Tonstate Group Ltd & Ors v Wojakovski & Ors [2021] EWHC 1122 (Ch) Mr Justice Zacaroli considered the issue of whether the right to payment under a Damages Based Agreement (DBA).  It was held that right to payment under…

SOLICITOR DID NOT HAVE GOOD GROUNDS TO TERMINATE THE RETAINER UNDER A CFA: CLAIM FOR £16,200 IN COSTS FAILS

SOLICITOR DID NOT HAVE GOOD GROUNDS TO TERMINATE THE RETAINER UNDER A CFA: CLAIM FOR £16,200 IN COSTS FAILS

February 1, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs

I am returning to the judgment of Master Haworth in  Murray & Anor v Richard Slade and Company Ltd [2021] EWHC B3 (Costs). This time looking at the decision in relation to termination of a conditional fee agreement. The Master held…

KERRY UNDERWOOD ON COSTS – AND SO MUCH MORE: SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE READ ALL ABOUT IT

January 27, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, QOCS

Kerry Underwood has  started a new Newsletter – “Kerry On Costs… And So Much More…”   THIRTY ISSUES IN 2021 The first issue can be seen here (and the link on this blog) and Kerry will produce at least 30…

SOLICITOR'S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE AFTER THEY HAD TERMINATED THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT: HIGH COURT DECISION

SOLICITOR’S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE AFTER THEY HAD TERMINATED THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT: HIGH COURT DECISION

October 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In  Toms (t/a Goldbergs Solicitors) v Brannan [2020] EWHC 2866 (QB) Mr Justice Griffiths dismissed a solicitor’s appeal against a decision that he was not able to recover costs from a client after a conditional fee agreement had been terminated….

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT IS ENFORCEABLE AFTER DEATH: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT TODAY

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT IS ENFORCEABLE AFTER DEATH: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT TODAY

October 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In Higgins & Co Lawyers Ltd -v- Evans [2019] EWHC 2809 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini overturned a decision that a conditional fee agreement was not enforceable after death. THE CASE The deceased had signed a CFA agreement with the…

PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESS FEES: REDUCTION TO 15% CONFIRMED BY COURT OF APPEAL: ATE INSURANCE IS RECOVERABLE AS A DISBURSEMENT

PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESS FEES: REDUCTION TO 15% CONFIRMED BY COURT OF APPEAL: ATE INSURANCE IS RECOVERABLE AS A DISBURSEMENT

April 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In Herbert v H H Law Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 527 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision on a solicitor and own client assessment that the additional liability in a simple personal injury case should be 15%. It allowed…

TERMINATING A CFA WITH GOOD REASON: NO NEED FOR SOLICITORS TO WAIT FOR GODOT: ADVICE ABOUT "SETTLEMENT" COVERS THE MAKING OF AN OFFER

TERMINATING A CFA WITH GOOD REASON: NO NEED FOR SOLICITORS TO WAIT FOR GODOT: ADVICE ABOUT “SETTLEMENT” COVERS THE MAKING OF AN OFFER

March 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In Butler v Bankside Commercial Ltd [2019] EWHC 510 (QB) Mr Justice Turner upheld a decision of Master Yoxall holding that a client was liable to pay their solicitor’s costs after a conditional fee agreement came to an end when the…

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT DID NOT CONTINUE AFTER A SOLICITOR HAD CEASED TO ACT: DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS TO FIRST SET OF SOLICITORS

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT DID NOT CONTINUE AFTER A SOLICITOR HAD CEASED TO ACT: DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS TO FIRST SET OF SOLICITORS

February 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

I am grateful to Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose TTKW for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Wulwik in Roman -v- AXA Insurance PLC (13/12/2018).   Roman v AXA Insurance [2018] (1) The judge found that a CFA with…

THE ASSIGNMENT  (OR NOVATION) OF CFAS: BOXING PROMOTER'S APPEAL SUFFERS KNOCKOUT BLOW BEFORE A PUNCH WAS THROWN

THE ASSIGNMENT (OR NOVATION) OF CFAS: BOXING PROMOTER’S APPEAL SUFFERS KNOCKOUT BLOW BEFORE A PUNCH WAS THROWN

December 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In Warren v Hill Dickinson LLP [2018] EWHC 3322 (QB) the proposed appellant did not get permission to appeal against a decision that an assigned (or novated) CFA remained valid. THE CASE The claimant argued that conditional fee agreements he had…

WHEN LITIGATION LAWYERS SPLIT UP: THE FALL OUT CONTINUES: A SPLIT TRIAL WAS FAR FROM WISE...

WHEN LITIGATION LAWYERS SPLIT UP: THE FALL OUT CONTINUES: A SPLIT TRIAL WAS FAR FROM WISE…

July 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In  FPH Law (a firm) v Brown (t/a Integrum Law) [2018] EWCA Civ 1629 the Court of Appeal dismissed the defendant’s appeal against a finding on a preliminary issue. There was a potential cause of action between two firms of solicitors…

CFA IS STILL VALID EVEN IF IT NAMES THE WRONG DEFENDANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

CFA IS STILL VALID EVEN IF IT NAMES THE WRONG DEFENDANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

June 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In  Malone v Birmingham Community NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 1376 the Court of Appeal held that a Conditional Fee Agreement was valid even though it named the wrong defendant.  The judgment contains important observations on how conditional fee agreements should…

COURT OF APPEAL STATES THAT NO ORDER FOR COSTS IS THE APPROPRIATE ORDER: "THIS IS A MELANCHOLY TALE"

COURT OF APPEAL STATES THAT NO ORDER FOR COSTS IS THE APPROPRIATE ORDER: “THIS IS A MELANCHOLY TALE”

May 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs

In  Sirketi v Kupeli & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 1264 the Court of Appeal overturned an order for costs in favour of the claimants with an order for no costs. It was, as Lord Justice Hickinbottom observed “a melancholy tale”.  The…

THE TIME FOR CHALLENGING A BILL HAS PROBABLY LONG GONE: AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN REFUSING AN APPLICATION FOR DELIVERY UP

THE TIME FOR CHALLENGING A BILL HAS PROBABLY LONG GONE: AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN REFUSING AN APPLICATION FOR DELIVERY UP

March 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

There is a battle (or a series of skirmishes) going on at present in relation to solicitors charging success fees to their clients in personal injury cases. This has led to numerous applications to the courts for disclosure.  The former…

ROUND ONE: WHAT IS A"WIN" UNDER A CFA?  ROUND TWO: THE ASSIGNMENT OF CFAS: FORMER CLIENT DOES NOT SCORE A KNOCKOUT BLOW

ROUND ONE: WHAT IS A”WIN” UNDER A CFA? ROUND TWO: THE ASSIGNMENT OF CFAS: FORMER CLIENT DOES NOT SCORE A KNOCKOUT BLOW

March 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In Warren v Hill Dickinson LLP [2018] EWHC B6 (Costs) Master Leonard considered what was meant by the term “win” in a conditional fee agreement.  He also considered whether a CFA was properly assigned.  The former client (the claimant in this…

WANT TO WORK HARD, WIN AND STILL NOT GET PAID II? LAWYERS COME TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: REVIEW YOUR RETAINER CAREFULLY

WANT TO WORK HARD, WIN AND STILL NOT GET PAID II? LAWYERS COME TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: REVIEW YOUR RETAINER CAREFULLY

February 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In Radford & Anor v Frade & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 119 the Court of Appeal upheld the early decisions that lawyers, who worked outside the terms of their retainer under a CFA, could not recover costs from the unsuccessful party….

WHEN A PARTY CHANGES ITS FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS PART WAY THROUGH: A CHANGE FROM DBA TO CFA DID NOT PREVENT THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING FULL COSTS

WHEN A PARTY CHANGES ITS FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS PART WAY THROUGH: A CHANGE FROM DBA TO CFA DID NOT PREVENT THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING FULL COSTS

January 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

The decision of Master James in Dial Partners LLP & Anor v Eastern Airways International Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC B1 (Costs) raises an interesting set of issues when a party changes the basis of its funding part-way through a case,…

1 2 Next →

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2022. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 26,223 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES LEADS TO PARTS OF A CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT BEING STRUCK OUT: COMPLY WITH THE RULES – OR ELSE
  • IS THE CCMCC BREAKING THE LAW ?THE DAMAGES PILOT AND CASES WHERE THE CCMC ARE REFUSING TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS: WHAT IS THE RELEVANT DATE FOR LIMITATION PURPOSES?
  • WITNESS DEMEANOUR: ARGUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: THINKING ABOUT DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF COSTS FROM THE OUTSET: WEBINAR 20th JULY 2022
  • “THE LADD -V- MARSHALL CRITERIA ARE CUMULATIVE”: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED BUT APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE REFUSED: APPEAL ON JUDGE’S FINDINGS OF FACT FAILED

Top Posts & Pages

  • IS THE CCMCC BREAKING THE LAW ?THE DAMAGES PILOT AND CASES WHERE THE CCMC ARE REFUSING TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS: WHAT IS THE RELEVANT DATE FOR LIMITATION PURPOSES?
  • WITNESS DEMEANOUR: ARGUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES LEADS TO PARTS OF A CLAIMANT'S WITNESS STATEMENT BEING STRUCK OUT: COMPLY WITH THE RULES - OR ELSE
  • THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: THINKING ABOUT DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF COSTS FROM THE OUTSET: WEBINAR 20th JULY 2022
  • "THE LADD -V- MARSHALL CRITERIA ARE CUMULATIVE": RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED BUT APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE REFUSED: APPEAL ON JUDGE'S FINDINGS OF FACT FAILED

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • Website of 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, Catastrophic Injury Group
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy

Copyright © 2022 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin