header-logo header-logo

15 January 2009
Issue: 7352 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Law reports: Solicitor—Costs—Conditional fee agreement

Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Arden, Thomas, Moore-Bick LJJ and
Master Hurst, 19 December 2008 ;

In July 2000, the claimant was a passenger in a car being driven by her brother, the defendant. He lost control of the vehicle, causing a crash. The claimant suffered serious injuries. She instructed solicitors and, in February 2001, the defendant’s insurers admitted liability on his behalf. Shortly afterwards the claimant instructed new solicitors, with whom she entered a CFA in May 2001. That agreement provided for a success fee of 98%, of which 15% represented the cost of funding. Clause 5 provided: “If we advise you to reject an offer of settlement or payment into court and the case goes ahead to trial where you are awarded damages which are equal to or less than the offer or payment in:- you do not have to pay any of our basic costs or percentage increase for the work done after we receive

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll