header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Risk versus reward

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Law Society calls for clarity on AML
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Turning corporate liability into opportunity
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
NLJ this week: A prince no more?
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
NLJ this week: Shareholder secrecy sunk
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
NLJ this week: The expanding remit of national security law
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll