Atack v Lee and Another: CA 16 Dec 2004

Defendant insurers had challenged conditional fee agreements involving a two stage success fee. Both cases took place before limitations were introduced by Callery v Gray.
Held: It would be wrong to apply Callery v Gray retrospectively. A two stage conditional success fee was to be encouraged. The success fee might properly be raised to up to 100% where a claim did not settle within the protocol period. However in each case the judge had used his discretion properly to assess the risk exposure in the light of knowledge available at the time. The appeals failed.


Lord Justice Brooke Lord Justice Longmore Lord Justice Mance


[2004] EWCA Civ 1712, Times 28-Dec-2004, [2005] 1 WLR 2643




England and Wales


CitedCallery v Gray, Russell v Pal Pak Corrugated Ltd (No 1) CA 18-Jul-2001
Claimants in modest, straightforward personal injury claims cases should have re-imbursed to them by the defendant, the cost of after the event insurance, if necessary by costs only proceedings. The solicitor’s success fee should also be recovered. . .

Cited by:

CitedAlfa Begum v Supin Klarit CA 15-Feb-2005
The court ordered the reduction of the success fees agreed between the claimant and her solicitors from 100% to 15%. The case was nearly a stone cold certainty. . .
CitedCoventry and Others v Lawrence and Another SC 22-Jul-2015
The appellants challenged the compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights of the system for recovery of costs in civil litigation in England and Wales following the passing of the Access to Justice Act 1999. The parties had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Costs

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.220343