header-logo header-logo

Tough on costs in Belsner

16 November 2022
Categories: Legal News , Costs , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
Checkmylegalfees.com, which advised Darya Belsner, has been ordered to make an interim payment of £130,000 on account of costs by 28 November.

In a ruling this week, the Court of Appeal also ordered the firm to repay £25,000 in costs which they received after the High Court hearing in late 2020.

Judgment in ‘costs case of the decade’ Belsner v CAM Legal Services [2022] EWCA Civ 1387 was handed down last month.

NLJ columnist Dominic Regan said: ‘The crippling costs order resonates with the Appeal Court judgment.

‘Sir Geoffrey Vos MR made it obvious at the hearing that he wanted to see the back of these modestly valued challenges in the High Court. The only slight problem is that the Solicitors Act 1974 says they must be pursued in the High Court.

‘Deputy Costs Judge Colin Campbell has been saying for ages that the Act is hopeless. Perhaps someone will now listen to one who knows.’

Some 900 cases were stayed pending judgment in Belsner, which concerned deductions from damages recovered in a motorcycle crash case brought on a conditional fee basis. On appeal, the court held the deductions were fair and reasonable and did not need to be paid back. Moreover, the solicitors were not obliged to obtain the client’s informed consent to the terms of the conditional fee agreement.

Sir Geoffrey Vos, giving the lead judgment, lamented that 'solicitors seem to be signing up their clients to a costs regime that allows them to charge significantly more than the claim is known in advance to be likely to be worth’.

Giving advice on how solicitors can seek to avoid Belsner-esque trouble, Dr Mark Friston, Hailsham Chambers, told NLJ: ‘Give the client a best estimate of your fees.

‘Give them your best estimate of what you expect to recover from the defendant. Explain, if the case, why your rates exceed the relevant guideline hourly rates and by how much. Tell your client what you charge for work, the cost of which would not be recoverable from an opponent, eg advising your client on costs and funding matters is entirely between you and them.’

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
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
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 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