header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 March 2023 / Richard Spector
Issue: 8017 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs , Legal services
printer mail-detail

The joy of damages-based agreements

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
114789
Highs, lows, successes & appreciative clients—Richard Spector shares his personal experience of damages-based agreements
  • Presents a solicitor’s personal experience of running damages-based agreement cases.
  • A low experience was where satellite litigation reduced the fee despite the case succeeding.
  • Outcomes are mainly positive, with good returns especially where cases settle early, and strengthens bonds between solicitor and client.

I have always thought of myself as one of the few solicitors who is a leading proponent of damages-based agreements (DBAs). DBAs are a form of fee agreement whereby the solicitor acts on a no-win no-fee basis and is entitled to a percentage of any damages recovered by the client.

DBAs were introduced by the Damages-Based Agreements Regulations 2013, SI 2013/609, and have not proven overly popular among solicitors so far. Solicitors have been reluctant to take on the additional risk of a DBA where, if they lose, they get nothing at all and, if they win, their fees depend on the amount of damages recovered. Damages are always strongly

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
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll