header-logo header-logo

New work for solicitors?

10 November 2011
Issue: 7489 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

High Court ruling on the powers of insurers to veto a policy holder’s choice of lawyer could open up new avenues for solicitors

A High Court ruling on the powers of insurers to veto a policy holder’s choice of lawyer could open up new avenues for solicitors, says the Association of Costs Lawyers.

In Brown-Quinn & Anor v Equity Syndicate Management Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 2661 (Comm), Mr Justice Burton held that before-the-event (BTE) legal expenses insurers cannot stop policy holders instructing non-panel firms because the lawyers’ rates are higher than the prescribed rates set by
the insurer.

The case involved three employment and discrimination claims. The insurers contended that policy holders could instruct non-panel solicitors as long as they did not charge more than their prescribed rates of £125 and £139 per hour. However, the policy holders instructed Webster Dixon, which charged £274 for a partner or associate, £210 for a solicitor and £105 for a trainee.

Iain Stark, chairman of the Association of Costs Lawyers, says the ruling will give solicitors new opportunities to tender for work.

“The judgment doesn’t provide clarity [on what rates will be paid] but it does provide an opportunity,” he says.

At the same time, solicitors who discount the use of BTE because of the rates on offer and instead put clients on conditional fee agreements will have to change their approach and give the BTE option more consideration, he adds.

Issue: 7489 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll