The costs case of the year returns to the Court of Appeal in July. Belsner v Cam was abandoned after a false, confusing start in February. The parties, with the Law Society intervening, have agreed a new list of issues. I am indebted to PJ Kirby QC who generously sent me a copy.
While the core of the case is about whether informed consent was given to authorise deductions from damages, the net has been thrown much wider. Does protocol activity, which is screamingly pre-action, somehow fall within the ambit of ‘proceedings in the county court’, and might it amount to ‘contentious business’?
What might render this the costs case of the century is a possible identification of any duties owed by a solicitor to their client when agreeing terms of remuneration. Up for grabs are contentions that such a duty might be fiduciary, contractual, regulatory or, most controversially, some inchoate common law obligation.
The same
