header-logo header-logo

No win, no fee in tribunals

24 June 2010
Issue: 7423 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Conditional fee agreements (CFAs) can be used in tribunal cases, the senior costs judge has held.

In Tel-Ka Talk Ltd v Commissioners of HM Revenue & Customs Master Hurst ruled that the use of “no win, no fee” cases or CFAs was lawful.
Delivering judgment Master Hurst said: “The position is that in the employment tribunal, solicitors may act under regulated damages based agreements or under CFAs.

“Failure to comply with the Damages Based Agreements Regulations may render the agreement unenforceable. It seems likely that in the future, legal representatives in the employment tribunal will rely on conditional fee agreements which are no longer regulated and which can be drafted in such a way as to produce the same result as a contingency fee agreement.”

In the case, Tel-Ka Talk was appealing against decisions of HMRC to refuse repayment of VAT input tax credit claimed by the company. The company suffered cash flow difficulties due to the withholding of VAT and found it difficult to fund the legal costs of their tribunal hearing.

The solicitors agreed to continue to act on a contingency fee basis and entered into a non-contentious business agreement. The contingency fee arrangement enabled the company to continue to pursue its claim and recover the VAT repayment it was owed by HMRC.

The legality of contingency fees before tribunals is implicitly acknowledged in the Solicitors Code of Conduct 2007, and the Law Society believes hundreds of solicitors enter into such agreements before tribunals every year.

Issue: 7423 / 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