David Burrows unravels the complexities of solicitors’ retainer contracts
The beginning and an ending of respective solicitors’ retainer contracts are represented by Re Z [2009] EWHC 3621 (Fam) and Buxton v Mills-Owens [2010] EWCA Civ 122, [2010] All ER (D) 242 (Feb). Each case raises important practice issues. Re Z deals with a husband’s application that a firm of solicitors should stop acting for his estranged wife, where a partner in the firm had previously acted for him. Buxton deals with the termination by a solicitor of his retainer contract, and the consequences for the solicitor in terms of being paid.
Re Z makes depressing reading: the elegance and depth of Bodey J’s analysis is beset by resonances of a firm’s concern to keep a wealthy client (costs at the pre-issue stage were around £150,000, to which Mr Z found himself contributing £32,500 towards a particular five-week period (para 48)). Buxton, meanwhile, represents a principled approach—by solicitors and Bar—to termination of a retainer which could no longer be reasonably performed: the costs in issue
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
