header-logo header-logo

17 December 2021 / Andrew Wilkinson
Issue: 7961 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Costs & success fees after Hirachand

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

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

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll