header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Conditional fee arrangements & interim statute bills: at odds with modern practice?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
27 September 2024 / Amy Dunkley
Issue: 8087 / Categories: Features , Profession , Costs
printer mail-detail
190798
Amy Dunkley analyses a recent judgment questioning the relationship between CFAs & interim statute bills
  • The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal in Signature Litigation LLP v Ivanishvili on the grounds that invoices worth £12.8m were not ‘final nor complete’.
  • Coulson LJ noted the appeal was an example of the ‘ongoing problem’ of the Solicitors Act 1974’s dichotomy with modern practice.

The Court of Appeal recently dismissed the appeal in Signature Litigation LLP v Ivanishvili [2024] EWCA Civ 901, [2024] All ER (D) 43 (Aug) on the grounds that invoices worth £12.8m were not ‘final nor complete’. Coulson LJ concluded that 79 paid invoices were not ‘interim statute’ bills (ISBs) under the Solicitors Act 1974 (SA 1974), and therefore the s 70 limit for challenge of one year after the bill had been paid did not apply.

The question in the appeal was whether the invoices were requests for payments on account or ISBs: the right to issue the latter can only arise

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Police, contempt and the rule of law
Can a chief constable be held responsible for disobedient officers? Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth, professor of public law at De Montfort University, examines a Court of Appeal ruling that answers firmly: yes
NLJ this week: When your brain signs the contract
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
NLJ this week: Comparators—how close is close enough?
Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first
NLJ this week: Domicile—more than where you live
In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss
NLJ this week: Arbitration’s fast lane—with guardrails
Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll