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
COST BITES 108: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: THE NEED FOR THE LAWYER TO GIVE ACCURATE ESTIMATES OF COST AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF INACCURACY (THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE SOLICITOR)

COST BITES 108: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: THE NEED FOR THE LAWYER TO GIVE ACCURATE ESTIMATES OF COST AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF INACCURACY (THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE SOLICITOR)

October 23, 2023 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

The judgment of Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker in Kenton v Slee Blackwell PLC [2023] EWHC 2613 (SCCO) provides an object lesson in the perils of the clear warnings and advice that clients have to be given in relation to costs….

SOLICITORS CAN'T RECOVER COSTS UNDER AN UNENFORCEABLE CFA: WHAT IS MORE THE CLIENTS CAN RECOVER SUMS BACK

SOLICITORS CAN’T RECOVER COSTS UNDER AN UNENFORCEABLE CFA: WHAT IS MORE THE CLIENTS CAN RECOVER SUMS BACK

October 16, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In Diag Human SE & Anor v Volterra Fietta (Re Assessment Under Part III Solicitors Act 1974) [2023] EWCA Civ 1107 the Court of Appeal upheld earlier judgments that solicitors, acting under a conditional fee agreement that claimed more than…

A CLIENT DOES NOT OWE A "DUTY OF GOOD FAITH" TO A SOLICITOR ACTING UNDER A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT

A CLIENT DOES NOT OWE A “DUTY OF GOOD FAITH” TO A SOLICITOR ACTING UNDER A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT

August 10, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs

In Candey Ltd v Bosheh & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 1103 Lord Justice Coulson rejected an argument that a client, who has entered into a conditional fee agreement with a solicitor, owed a duty of good faith to that solicitor. …

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'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….

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CANDOUR FROM THE APPLICANT AND NO EVIDENCE FROM THE DEFENDANT TO PROVE PREJUDICE

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CANDOUR FROM THE APPLICANT AND NO EVIDENCE FROM THE DEFENDANT TO PROVE PREJUDICE

November 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Relief from sanctions

There is a report of a case where relief from sanctions was granted in Anglia Autoflow North America LLC and Another v Anglia Autoflow Ltd [2019] Costs LR 155. One thing that marks this case is the total candour from the…

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…

PROVING THINGS 150: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH THAT THE MOVE FROM LEGAL AID TO CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT WAS A REASONABLE STEP

PROVING THINGS 150: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH THAT THE MOVE FROM LEGAL AID TO CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT WAS A REASONABLE STEP

May 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Experts

In YZ v Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC B4 (Costs) Master Gordon-Saker found that the claimant had not established good grounds for changing from legal aid to a conditional fee agreement.   Although this is a costs issue, it…

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…

LIEN, THE SOLICITOR AND THE INSURER: NO SAFE HAVEN FOR DEFENDANTS

LIEN, THE SOLICITOR AND THE INSURER: NO SAFE HAVEN FOR DEFENDANTS

April 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Access to justice, Appeals, Costs

The judgment of the Supreme Court this morning in Gavin Edmondson Solicitors Ltd v Haven Insurance Company Ltd [2018] UKSC 21. It confirms that solicitors are entitled to costs in cases where the defendant’s insurer, knowing of the solicitor’s involvement,  settled…

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…

1 2 3 Next →

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2023. 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 32.7K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • THIS MAY (OR MAY NOT) BE THE FINAL CLAIM FORM CASE OF 2023: CLAIMANT MAKES FUNDAMENTAL MISTAKE AS TO SERVICE, DEFENDANTS FAIL TO NOTICE IN TIME: THERE IS MUCH TO LEARN HERE…
  • CLAIMANTS’ SOLICITORS WERE ON NOTICE THAT AN EXPERT’S REPORTS COULD NOT BE RELIED UPON: THE ISSUE OF PROCEEDINGS WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
  • WEBINAR ON CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE COSTS: KING CHAMBERS EVENT: 7th DECEMBER 2023
  • COST BITES 125:JOCKEYING FOR POSITION: ALLEGATIONS OF CONDUCT INCREASING COSTS – BUT THERE WAS NO DEDUCTION FROM SUCCESSFUL PARTY’S COSTS:
  • NEW YEAR NEW HOURLY RATES: INDEXED LINK UPLIFT OF RATES FROM 1st JANUARY 2024: SEE THEM HERE

Top Posts & Pages

  • CLAIMANTS' SOLICITORS WERE ON NOTICE THAT AN EXPERT'S REPORTS COULD NOT BE RELIED UPON: THE ISSUE OF PROCEEDINGS WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
  • THIS MAY (OR MAY NOT) BE THE FINAL CLAIM FORM CASE OF 2023: CLAIMANT MAKES FUNDAMENTAL MISTAKE AS TO SERVICE, DEFENDANTS FAIL TO NOTICE IN TIME: THERE IS MUCH TO LEARN HERE...
  • NEW YEAR NEW HOURLY RATES: INDEXED LINK UPLIFT OF RATES FROM 1st JANUARY 2024: SEE THEM HERE
  • COST BITES 125:JOCKEYING FOR POSITION: ALLEGATIONS OF CONDUCT INCREASING COSTS - BUT THERE WAS NO DEDUCTION FROM SUCCESSFUL PARTY'S COSTS:
  • GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT

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
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2023
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • 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 © 2023 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin

 

Loading Comments...