Interim Statute Bills Versus Requests For Payment On Account

“It is entirely routine for clients to seek Section 70 and for there to be a dispute between the parties as to whether the Bill in question is an interim statute, or interim non-statute, Bill. If the Solicitor prevails in arguing that it is an interim statute Bill and beyond the scope of , that is the end of it. However, if the client prevails in arguing that it is an interim non-statute Bill, the usual outcome is for an order that the Solicitor should render a final Bill for those costs, that will enable the same to be assessed as the client wishes.”

Rippon Patel And French LLP v Mowlam [2020] EWHC 1079 (QB)

Solicitors Act 1974 | Part Payments, Delay And Special Circumstances

This was an appeal from a decision of Master Nagalingam in which he found that a bill rendered by the solicitors to their former client had not been paid and that “special circumstances” existed such that a , pursuant to section 70 of the Solicitors Act 1974, should be carried out.

Informed Consent

CPR 46.9(3): Informed Consent In Solicitors Act Detailed Assessments

Master Victoria McCloud (sitting as a Deputy Costs Judge in the SCCO) determined preliminary issues in the course of a proceeding under the Solicitors Act 1974, namely:
whether the entirety of the solicitors’ fees were incurred with the client’s consent in the sum claimed; or, alternatively
if not whether at least the level of success fee was incurred with consent.

AINSWORTH v STEWARTS LAW [2019] EWCA Civ 897

Points Of dispute In Solicitor And Client Assessments | It’s In The Detail

This was an appeal from a decision of Master Gordon-Saker made in the course of proceedings brought under s70 Solicitors Act 1974. The Master had summarily dismissed the claimant’s points of dispute on work done on documents, on grounds that they did not further the overriding objective. Specifically, the points of dispute were not, “to the point”. They did not summarise all of the particular objections to the specific points which the claimant wished to advance at the hearing so that the court and the defendant knew or knew sufficiently the case the defendant had to meet.

HOWARD KENNEDY LLP v SPARTAFIELD LIMITED [2019] EWHC 1218 (Ch)

The relevance of costs estimates where no reliance is shown

Another important reminder of the importance of giving your client the best costs information possible throughout the life of your retainer. In this case the senior costs judge Master Gordon-Saker determined at first instance that notwithstanding the fact that the former client had not placed any reliance on any of the estimates provided to it by the solicitors, and acknowledging that unforeseen work had been undertaken, he was entitled to use the estimate as a yardstick in determining the reasonable costs payable as between solicitor and client. On appeal, Ms Clare Ambrose (Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) declined to interfere with this decision.

15%

100% success fee model in low value personal injury claims shut down by Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal has upheld the decisions of District Judge Bellamy (first instance) and Soole J (on appeal) that a 100% success fee in a low value personal injury claim which was fixed without any reference to the actual risk involved amounted to a cost of “an unusual nature or amount” under CPR 46.9(3)(c).

Knockout

High Court deals knock out blow to appeal brought on grounds of an alleged invalid assignment of two CFAs