header-logo header-logo

Costs & success fees after Hirachand

17 December 2021 / Andrew Wilkinson
Issue: 7961 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail
67444
Andrew Wilkinson considers the implications of Hirachand v Hirachand for lawyers & probate practitioners
  • Success fees can be recovered from an estate, the Court of Appeal held in Hirachand v Hirachand.

On Friday, 15 October, the Court of Appeal confirmed that success fees could be recovered from an estate as part of a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. The ruling, in Hirachand v Hirachand [2021] EWCA Civ 1498, is confirmation that successful claimants under the Act enjoy special treatment when it comes to the recovery of costs, when compared to litigants in other claims, where the success fee is not recoverable.

This decision means that successful claimants under the Act will be able to preserve a greater share of the monies recovered under a successful claim, but will cost defendants even more, so could make cases harder to settle. On the face of it, it can be easy to think the decision will open the floodgates to lots of conditional fee agreement (CFA)

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