The claimant sought to challenge the After the Event Insurance (ATE) bought by its solicitors late in the day in their claim, before then withdrawing the conditional fee agreement. The premium was over andpound;90,000.
Held: The appeal failed. It had been reasonable to take out the ATE policy because of decisions made by the claimants which would increase the risks the solicitors would face. There was no evidence as to the reasonableness of the premium charged, and ‘in a case where the issue is raised as to the size of the premium there is an evidential burden on the paying party to advance at least some material in support of the contention that the premium is unreasonable.’ If necessary that party could bring expert evidence.
There is a well-established principle that the Court will not permit appeals on questions which are ultimately matters of judgment for the Costs Judge.
Simon J
[2010] EWHC 1008 (QB)
Bailii
Solicitors Act 1974 70, Access to Justice Act 1999 29
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Callery 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 – Meretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others ChD 14-Nov-2007
The parties disputed the success of a sale by a mortgagee in possession of various properties. The parties disputed the apportionment of costs.
Held: The appeal failed. Where there is no express agreement concerning the division of costs, a . .
Cited – Callery v Gray (1) and (2) HL 27-Jun-2002
Success fees and ATE premiums were recoverable
Objection was made to a claimed uplift of 20% sought by the plaintiff’s solicitors. The defendant’s insurers said that there had been little at risk for them.
Held: The system of conditional fees insurance had been introduced to remedy defects . .
Cited – Rogers v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council CA 31-Jul-2006
The Court considered the validity of after the event legal expenses insurance and conditional fee agreements schemes, and in particular whether an ATE premium was recoverable by a successful claimant. The damages had been agreed in the sum of pounds . .
Cited – Regina v Common Professional Examination Board, Ex Parte Mealing-Mcclead CA 19-Apr-2000
A party was required to pay money into court before pursuing an appeal. She borrowed money for this purpose but on the express condition that it should be used for this purpose only and was not to become part of her general assets. The money was . .
Cited – Rogers v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council CA 31-Jul-2006
The Court considered the validity of after the event legal expenses insurance and conditional fee agreements schemes, and in particular whether an ATE premium was recoverable by a successful claimant. The damages had been agreed in the sum of pounds . .
Cited – Hornsby v Clarke Kenneth Leventhal (A Firm) SCCO 16-Jun-2000
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Legal Professions, Costs
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.414971
