header-logo header-logo

02 September 2022 / Dan Stacey
Issue: 7992 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Belsner v Cam Legal: looking back to look ahead

92274
As the headline case rumbles on, Dan Stacey explores the courts’ previous stances on the issue of fiduciary duties & solicitors’ remuneration
  • Previous rulings, both before and after the Attorneys’ and Solicitors’ Act 1870, established the position of the courts on fiduciary duties and solicitors’ remuneration.
  • There is no indication that such duties relating to remuneration do not survive into the present.

The ongoing YouTube soap opera of Belsner v Cam Legal in the Court of Appeal is now to have further screenings on 4, 5 and 6 October 2022. It is a convenient opportunity to consider fiduciary duties and solicitors’ remuneration, one of the issues at stake in the appeal. It is suggested here that a solicitor owes a fiduciary duty to deal fairly with the client in respect of remuneration before and during the currency of the retainer.

Fair dealing

First, that a fiduciary duty is owed by a solicitor to a client is not in doubt: eg Clark Boyce v Mouat [1994]

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll