header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
05 February 2015 / Francis Kendall
Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Costs , Jackson
printer mail-detail

The lament of the DBA

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

What does the future hold for damages-based agreements, asks Francis Kendall

A damages-based agreement (DBA) is an agreement between a lawyer and his client under which the client agrees to pay the lawyer a percentage of any sums recovered in a claim. The lawyer is not paid if the case is lost. Previously unlawful for contentious work (ignoring employment and other tribunal claims), s 45 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, supported by the Damages-Based Agreements Regulations 2013 (SI 2013/609), allowed DBAs from 1 April 2013—a direct result of the Jackson report.

The maximum payment that the lawyer can recover from the client’s damages is capped at 25% of damages (excluding damages for future care and loss) in personal injury cases; 35% of damages on employment tribunal cases (as has existed since 2010); and 50% of damages in all other cases.

Costs recovery from the losing party will proceed as usual based on the costs actually incurred with the client liable to pay any shortfall from their

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

Read All
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll