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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll