header-logo header-logo

27 October 2011
Issue: 7486 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

100% success fee claim sinks

Court of Appeal rules on landmark UK costs case

The Court of Appeal has given judgment on the biggest costs case in English legal history.

Motto v Trafigura [2011] EWCA Civ 1150 concerned Leigh, Day & Co’s claim for £100m costs for its group action on behalf of about 30,000 citizens of the Ivory Coast against Trafigura. This followed an incident where a Trafigura-chartered ship hired contractors to dispose of toxic waste, which was then dumped in Abidjan, the Ivorian capital. The case settled for just under £1,000 per claimant plus costs.

The court upheld Trafigura’s appeal on proportionality, holding that any item on the bill is only to be allowed if it was necessary. It held Leigh, Day & Co could recover costs in respect of “abandoned claims” in so far as it was “reasonable and proportionate to plead, investigate and pursue them”.

The court upheld the costs judge’s determination of a 58% success fee rather than the 100% claimed by Leigh, Day & Co. It held that the cost of advertising to or identifying potential clients, and the cost of arranging a conditional fee agreement (CFA) are not recoverable costs amd that costs incurred before CFAs have been entered into cannot be recovered.

Delivering judgment, Lord Neuberger said: “Until the CFA is signed, the potential claimant is not merely not a claimant: he is not a client…It seems to me that the expenses of getting business, whether advertising to the public as potential clients, making a presentation to a potential client, or discussing a possible instruction with a potential client, should not normally be treated as attributable to, and payable by, the ultimate client or clients. Rather, such expenses should generally be treated as part of a solicitor’s general overheads or expenses, which can be taken into account when assessing appropriate levels of charging, such as hourly rates.”

In a statement, Leigh, Day & Co said: “We’re pleased that the Court of Appeal has largely upheld the decision of Master Hurst that we’ve always been content with. This is another step within the detailed assessment of our costs and we now move on to going through the bill of costs, item by item.”
 

Issue: 7486 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
back-to-top-scroll