header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
11 December 2017 / Amanda Stevens
Issue: 7774 / Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Budana: a victory for common sense

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

​Amanda Stevens hopes clarity on recovery will reduce wasted costs & encourage a less defensive approach

In what has been described as the most important costs decision since the Jackson reforms were introduced, the long-awaited Court of Appeal decision in Budana v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 1980 has ruled that a conditional fee agreement (CFA) can be validly transferred from one law firm to another.

Briefly: the background. A heavily pregnant Mrs Budana was injured after she tripped on a defective pavement within the Leeds hospital premises. She instructed, Baker Rees, under a no win no fee (CFA) agreement, to pursue a claim for damages. However, they later advised her that they would not be continuing their personal injury practice, deeming such work to be no longer economically viable as a result of the then upcoming implementation of the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 ((LASPO).

My firm, Hudgell Solicitors, agreed to continue Baker Rees’s

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
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll