header-logo header-logo

Risk versus reward

12 July 2018 / Francis Kendall
Issue: 7801 / Categories: Features , Fees , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
845452240_0

What has Herbert taught us about setting success fees & implied or informed consent? Francis Kendall explains

  • The judgment in Herbert v HH Law confirms that risk assessments are necessary when establishing the success fee.
  • Clients’ approval of the type or amount of costs incurred requires their informed consent.

A recent High Court ruling has shown that solicitors still need to undertake individual risk assessments before setting the success fee in minor road traffic accident cases (RTA), and also obtain their clients’ ‘informed consent’ to the figure.

Market norm

In Herbert v HH Law Ltd [2018] EWHC 580 (QB), [2018] All ER (D) 168 (Mar), claimant Nicky Herbert was advised by her solicitors, Hampson Hughes (HH), to accept an offer of £3,400 for a rear-end shunt by a bus, of which £829 would be deducted as the firm’s success fee (25% of damages) and £349 for after-the-event (ATE) insurance. She accepted the offer but subsequently instructed JG Solicitors, which has been much in the news of late for its work challenging deductions from

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll