header-logo header-logo

11 March 2014 / William Robins
Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Transfer complications

William Robins outlines the challenges involved when a case pursued under a CFA is transferred to another firm

There are two undisputed truths at play in the legal sector at present:

  • first, clients want their lawyers to think out of the box and to “risk share”;
  • second, the pressures on partners with client followings from overheads, clients, and competitors have led to more partner-level lawyers moving.

When you put the above two factors together, it is not surprising to learn that it is commonplace for cases pursued under a conditional fee agreement (CFA) to move from one firm to another. Transferring files between firms is not easy at the best of times; one has to consider unpaid fees, work in progress (WIP), the impact on all three parties (the client and both firms) and, of course, compliance with the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority (SRA) Code.

These complications are greatly increased where the case to be transferred is subject to a CFA entered into before April

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll