header-logo header-logo

Trading places with a CFA

17 April 2019 / David Bailey-Vella
Categories: Features , Costs , Legal services
printer mail-detail
David Bailey-Vella analyses Roman v AXA Insurance
  • When clients move from one firm to another can a conditional fee agreement be transferred?
  • The landmark ruling in Budana v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust (Law Society intervening).
  • Far reaching practical implications and ramifications.

When clients move from one firm to another the valuation of work in progress (WIP) and the issue of costs recoverability, is never straightforward.

The core issues centre around whether a conditional fee agreement (CFA) can be transferred; and, if so whether the first firm will still be entitled to payment; and whether the additional liabilities under a pre Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) CFA will be recoverable when a new agreement has been entered into after 1 April 2013.

There has been considerable technical argument as to whether or not it is possible to transfer a CFA; most of the argument has concerned the distinction between novation and assignment. It was thought that a CFA must be assigned for a pre LASPO

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

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll