header-logo header-logo

02 September 2022 / Dan Stacey
Issue: 7992 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Belsner v Cam Legal: looking back to look ahead

92274
As the headline case rumbles on, Dan Stacey explores the courts’ previous stances on the issue of fiduciary duties & solicitors’ remuneration
  • Previous rulings, both before and after the Attorneys’ and Solicitors’ Act 1870, established the position of the courts on fiduciary duties and solicitors’ remuneration.
  • There is no indication that such duties relating to remuneration do not survive into the present.

The ongoing YouTube soap opera of Belsner v Cam Legal in the Court of Appeal is now to have further screenings on 4, 5 and 6 October 2022. It is a convenient opportunity to consider fiduciary duties and solicitors’ remuneration, one of the issues at stake in the appeal. It is suggested here that a solicitor owes a fiduciary duty to deal fairly with the client in respect of remuneration before and during the currency of the retainer.

Fair dealing

First, that a fiduciary duty is owed by a solicitor to a client is not in doubt: eg Clark Boyce v Mouat [1994] 1 AC 428 at p437E. That is due to the

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll