header-logo header-logo

Ceasing to act

26 January 2018 / Richard Harrison
Issue: 7778 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail
nlj_7778_harrison

Richard Harrison considers the practicalities & legalities of ‘coming off the record’

  • What is the effect on a court case of a solicitor ceasing to act for a client?
  • What are the requirements to put this into effect?

Many (including possibly some judges) share the mistaken belief that, even if solicitors have validly terminated their retainer with a client, they owe duties to the court to continue to incur costs and represent the client unless the court gives them permission to withdraw. Quite simply that is not the case. The process for ceasing to act does not entail getting permission from the court to stop representing the client.

The requirements under CPR Pt 42.3 are, as the commentary makes clear, based on establishing certainty of communication and service. The rule is headed: ‘Order that a solicitor has ceased to act’ and states that ‘a solicitor may apply for an order declaring that he has ceased to be the solicitor acting for a party’.

This is not framed in terms of permission to stop acting.

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

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll