header-logo header-logo

Legal triggers

01 April 2010 / David Burrows
Issue: 7411 & 7412 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

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

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

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll