header-logo header-logo

08 January 2016
Issue: 7681 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Little claimants, big success fees

CPR PD 21, par 11.3 applies where a claimant’s litigation friend (at the instigation of the claimant’s solicitor) seeks to have what is more often than not 25% of the claimant’s damages paid to the claimant’s solicitor by way of a conditional fee agreement success fee. Is it proper for a judge to decline to approve the settlement on the sole ground that the success fee sought is excessive? If the judge does approve subject to only part of the success fee sought being clawed back from the damages, does that put the litigation friend in peril of being sued for the shortfall?

It is not uncommon for the judge to be unhappy about the size of the success fee in an uncomplicated claim where there could never have been any serious argument about liability or quantum. A typical example is a whiplash claim by child claimant in a motoring accident where it is plain as a pikestaff that the defendant was entirely negligent for the accident. Nor is it uncommon for the claimant’s solicitor on the approval appointment to fail to produce

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