header-logo header-logo

10 November 2011
Issue: 7489 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

New work for solicitors?

High Court ruling on the powers of insurers to veto a policy holder’s choice of lawyer could open up new avenues for solicitors

A High Court ruling on the powers of insurers to veto a policy holder’s choice of lawyer could open up new avenues for solicitors, says the Association of Costs Lawyers.

In Brown-Quinn & Anor v Equity Syndicate Management Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 2661 (Comm), Mr Justice Burton held that before-the-event (BTE) legal expenses insurers cannot stop policy holders instructing non-panel firms because the lawyers’ rates are higher than the prescribed rates set by
the insurer.

The case involved three employment and discrimination claims. The insurers contended that policy holders could instruct non-panel solicitors as long as they did not charge more than their prescribed rates of £125 and £139 per hour. However, the policy holders instructed Webster Dixon, which charged £274 for a partner or associate, £210 for a solicitor and £105 for a trainee.

Iain Stark, chairman of the Association of Costs Lawyers, says the ruling will give solicitors new opportunities to tender for work.

“The judgment doesn’t provide clarity [on what rates will be paid] but it does provide an opportunity,” he says.

At the same time, solicitors who discount the use of BTE because of the rates on offer and instead put clients on conditional fee agreements will have to change their approach and give the BTE option more consideration, he adds.

Issue: 7489 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll