header-logo header-logo

The end of champerty?

14 April 2011 / Mark James
Issue: 7461 + 7462 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Mark James considers where a recent Court of Appeal ruling leaves the doctrine of champerty

Can a solicitor provide his own client with an indemnity against the client’s contingent liability to pay the other side’s costs in contentious business or does such an indemnity render the entire retainer void for champerty? Cases at first instance (Dix v Townend [2008] EWHC 90117 and Lewis v Tenants Distribution Limited [2010] EWHC 90161 (Costs)) reached different conclusions. The issue reached the Court of Appeal in Morris v Southwark LBC [2011] EWCA Civ 25, [2011] All ER (D) 183 (Jan).

Morris was a landlord and tenant case against a social landlord for disrepair to the claimant’s home. The claim settled for £10,000 compensation plus an agreement by the council to carry out the necessary repairs and pay costs. There was a conditional fee agreement (CFA) (ie, a “no win no fee” agreement) with a 10% success fee and an indemnity-against-other-side’s costs (IAOSC). Legal aid is

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