header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
11 March 2016
Issue: 7690 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Legal aid

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Lord Chancellor v Charles Ete and Co and others [2016] EWHC 275 (QB), [2016] All ER (D) 236 (Feb)

The Queen’s Bench Division held that the claimant was entitled to recover payment on account made to the defendant solicitors firm in accordance with Legal Services Commission v Loomba and s 3(1) of the Access to Justice Act 1999.

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Zylpha LogoClick to know more
Browne Jacobson—Simone Ketchell

Browne Jacobson—Simone Ketchell

Browne Jacobson adds top property litigation Partner in record real estate expansion

Fieldfisher—Megan Goodyer

Fieldfisher—Megan Goodyer

Fieldfisher expands Personal Injury team with impressive partner from Stewarts

Clyde & Co—Jack Holling

Clyde & Co—Jack Holling

Global firm strengthens insurance practice with appointment of partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Fairness or formula? Rethinking discipline for dishonest lawyers
Should every solicitor found to have acted dishonestly face automatic striking off? The answer, argues John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke LLP in NLJ this week, is no 
NLJ this week: Sovereign immunity still blocks award enforcement
Winning an arbitral award against a state is one thing; enforcing it is another
NLJ this week: What court losses reveal about government power
Can government success in court tell us whether the rule of law is healthy? 
NLJ this week: Courts favour common sense over clumsy clauses
Poorly drafted dispute resolution clauses can trigger litigation before the real dispute is even addressed
NLJ this week: Crypto assets under the divorce spotlight
As cryptocurrency becomes mainstream, family lawyers are increasingly confronting the challenges it creates on divorce
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll