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…
COST BITES 367: THE SOLICITOR’S TERMS OF BUSINESS MEANT THAT BILLS RENDERED WERE EACH FINAL BILLS: THE TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT WERE “UNEQUIVOCALLY CLEAR”
The issue of whether “interim” bills rendered by solicitors were “statute” bills or “Chamberlain” bills is one that can have profound practical importance. If they are not statute bills then they may be open to a Solicitors Act assessment. If…
COST BITES 252: WHEN CAN A SOLICITOR PROPERLY TERMINATE A RETAINER? WAS THE CLIENT “THROWN TO THE LIONS”?
Here we are looking at a very small part of a judgment in relation to costs on a solicitor/own client assessment. On of the arguments put forward by the (former) client was that the retainer was wrongfully terminated shortly before…
COST BITES 250: SHOULD THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITOR BE ENTITLED TO RECOVER A FULL SUCCESS FEE AND THE ATE PREMIUM? A DECISION MADE ON APPEAL
We are looking at a decision made on appeal in relation to the very common issue of the percentage of a success fee and the taking out, and subsequent deduction from damages, of an After the Event Insurance policy. The…
COST BITES 228 : DEFENDANT SOLICITOR TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE CLAIMANT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS SEEKING A STATUTE BILL
In Franklin v Your Lawyers Ltd [2025] EWHC 984 (SCCO) Acting Senior Costs Judge Rowley dismissed a defendant solicitor’s argument that it should recover its costs after its former client had issued proceedings seeking the delivery of a statute bill. …
COST BITES 224 : SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: COSTS JUDGE DISMISSES CLAIMANT’S PART 8 ACTION BECAUSE THERE WERE PART 7 PROCEEDINGS PENDING: (DEFENDANT’S COSTS DESCRIBED AS “INCREDIBLE)”
In Captivatiun Ltd v Orr Litchfield Solicitors Ltd [2025] EWHC 679 (SCCO) Costs Judge Nagalingam dismissed a client’s application for an assessment of costs under Part 8. The application was made out of time and there were ongoing Part 7…
SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: KEEPING THE CLIENT INFORMED: AN ASSESSESSMENT WHERE THE AMOUNTS IN QUESTION WERE NOT APPROVED BY THE CLIENT
The judgment of Costs Judge Nagalingam in Underhill v Thackray Williams Solicitors [2024] EWHC 3206 (SCCO) could well serve as an object lesson in the need for a solicitor to keep their client informed of developments in costs and to…
COST BITES 183: A SERIES OF BILLS WERE NOT STATUTE BILLS: “CHAMBERLAIN” NOT ENGAGED: THE JUDGE WOULD HAVE FOUND “SPECIAL REASONS” TO ALLOW ASSESSMENT IN ANY EVENT
In Guest Supplies Intl Ltd v Spector Constant & Williams Limited [2024] EWHC 2450 (SCCO) Costs Judge Nagalingam decided that a series of bills sent by a solicitor were not statutory bills, neither were they “Chamberlain bills”. In any event…
COST BITES 131: TIME LIMIT FOR ASSESSMENT EXTENDED WHEN BENEFICIARY CHALLENGES COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
I am grateful to barrister Alicia Tew for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal decision today in Kenig v Thomson Snell & Passmore Llp [2023] EWHC 181 (SCCO). The Court considered the question of whether the costs judge…
COST BITES 95: A SOLICITOR’S BILL IS “PAID” WHEN FUNDS ARE DEDUCTED FROM DAMAGES AND A COMPLIANT BILL SENT TO THE CLIENT
NB this decision was overturned by the Supreme Court. See the discussion on the Supreme Court decision here. In Menzies v Oakwood Solicitors Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 844 the Court of Appeal held that a solicitors bill is “paid” when…
SOLICITOR'S NEGLIGENCE & SOLICITOR'S COSTS: ELEMENTARY ISSUES WORTH READING
The transcript of Edwin Coe LLP -v- Aidiniantz [2014] EWHC 3994 (QB) is worth reading for a number of reasons: (i) The nature of the duty owed by the solicitor in litigation; (ii)evidence and contemporary documents and (iii) the circumstances…
You must be logged in to post a comment.