header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
18 October 2007 / Amanda Ashton
Issue: 7293 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

A cautionary tale

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Defendant costs agents are coming up with ever more inventive challenges to fixed fees, says Amanda Ashton

The introduction of fixed costs for road traffic accidents (RTAs), the revocation of the Conditional Fee Agreement Regulations 2000 (SI 2000/692) and the mediated settlement in Wollard v Fowler [2005] EWHC 90051 (costs), concerning medical agency fees, set the scene for a reduction in prevalence of costs litigation, which has been an unfortunate feature of recent times. Or so it was hoped.

Hostilities continue, however, with the latest challenges to the application of fixed fees under CPR 44.11 centred around a small group of cases in the lower courts, Wetzel v KBC Fidea [2007] EWHC 90079 (costs), Patel v Admiral Insurance (substituted) (4 April 2007 Liverpool CC, DJ Hawthorne) and Kilby v Gawith) (4 April 2007 Birkenhead CC, DJ Peake). These cases include claims for success fees in a road traffic case where the claimants had entered into conditional fee agreements (CFAs) where there was potentially before the event (BTE) insurance cover available.

REALITY CHECK

At first glance

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
Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Firm awards training contracts to paralegals through internal programme

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Private client disputes specialist joins commercial litigation team

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Cumbria firm appoints new head of residential property

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
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’ 
NLJ this week: Family law urged to ditch adversarial instincts
Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll