header-logo header-logo

12 May 2016
Issue: 7699 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Jones result: CFAs can be assigned

​Court rules that assignment of CFAs does not breach the indemnity principle

A conditional fee agreement (CFA) can be assigned, a court has held, in a decision that will affect thousands of cases.

Ruling in the county court at Liverpool in Jones v Spire Healthcare (App No 96/2015) last week, Judge Graham Wood QC held that an insolvent firm of solicitors can validly assign its entitlement and responsibility under a CFA with a client to another firm of solicitors.

If they were not able to do so, Judge Wood said, then potentially recoverable costs would be “lost forever…to the disadvantage of any creditor in the administration, and to the advantage of an opposing party who might escape a substantial liability for costs in the event of losing the case”.

The case arose after well-known Midlands law firm Barnetts went into administration in 2013, and its CFA personal injury cases were bought by SGI Legal. A deed of assignment was drafted by specialist counsel. The claimant in Jones signed a separate deed of assignment and eventually settled her case for £17,500. Last year, a county court judge ruled that personal contracts could not be assigned under common law.

Hannah Riordan, associate at law firm Clarion, says: “Sitting at the County Court at Liverpool, HHJ Wood ruled that DJ Jenkinson was wrong to construe the ‘Jenkins exception’ to the rule against CFA assignment, so narrowly as to only apply where a client loyally follows an individual fee earner from one firm to another.

“Given that most modern day case handling is conducted at a distance, such circumstances would often be too difficult to prove. This judgment means that assignment of CFAs does not breach the indemnity principle, and will result in a valid retainer, allowing recovery of both pre-and post-assignment costs.”

NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan, of City University, says: “In a decision affecting thousands of cases where costs run into the millions, it has been held that one can lawfully assign a CFA.

“The practical upshot is that a newly appointed solicitor can take the benefit of the original agreement. Thus, costs and a recoverable success fee will accrue.”

Issue: 7699 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

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