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

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll