COST BITES 395: A RETAINER WAS NOT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE TERMS IN RELATION TO HOURLY RATES RENDERED IT TOO UNCERTAIN (COURT OF APPEAL DECISION YESTERDAY)
This appeal has been much discussed in the specialist press. A solicitor’s client argued that the terms of a retainer rendered in a Contentious Business Agreement. This would have given her greater scope to dispute the bills. The Court of…
COST BITES 374: IF THIS WAS A CBA THE UNILATERAL ABILITY TO VARY RATES WOULD HAVE LED TO IT BEING SET ASIDE ON THE GROUNDS IT WAS UNREASONABLE
We are continuing with our examination of a case we looked at yesterday. The court found that the agreement between the parties was not a Contentious Business Agreement. However the judge also stated that it it had been a CBA…
COST BITES 373: THIS ENGAGEMENT LETTER WAS NOT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT: “CERTAINTY” IS AN ESSENTIAL INGREDIENT
In this case the court considered whether a solicitor’s letter of engagement amounted to the creation of a Contentious Business Agreement. It was held that there was too much uncertainty for this to be a CBA. The failure to set…
IF YOU ENTER INTO A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT WITH YOUR CLIENT ARE YOU PLAYING RUSSIAN ROULETTE?
The judgment of Master Campbell in Addleshaw Goddard LLP -v- Wood & Hellard [2015] EWHC B12 (Costs) has some interesting observations on contentious business agreements and the nature of litigation financing generally. THE CASE The claimant solicitors had entered into…
You must be logged in to post a comment.