header-logo header-logo

29 May 2008
Issue: 7323 / Categories: Case law , Public , Legal services , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Civil Litigation

Kilby v Gawith [2008] All ER (D) 248 (May)

The question to be decided was whether there is a discretion under CPR 45.11(1) to allow a success fee once the claimant has entered into a conditional fee agreement.

HELD While CPR r 45.11(1) provides that a claimant “may recover a success fee”, the natural meaning is that a claimant is entitled to claim a success fee. CPR r 45.11(2) provides that the amount of the success fee “shall be” 12.5%, which means that where a success fee is recovered it has to be 12.5%. If the draftsman had intended there to be a discretion to grant a success fee, he would not have fettered that discretion by specifying the amount.

 

Issue: 7323 / Categories: Case law , Public , Legal services , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

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
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
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’
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
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
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
back-to-top-scroll