header-logo header-logo

Claims management DBAs

03 June 2016
Issue: 7701 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Is a damages-based agreement enforceable where it has been made between a costs management company and a child’s litigation friend which would have been enforceable if the litigation friend had made it with a lawyer? If so, is it a proper exercise of the court’s discretion on an approval hearing to order that the amount due to the company be paid out of the child’s damages?

There may be a liability to pay a percentage of damages for claims management services (within the meaning of s 4(2)(b) of the Compensation Act 2006) on the part of the person who has instructed the claims management company. However, that would not be a liability of the child and the court might well refuse to approve any part of the child’s damages being used to satisfy the litigation friend’s liability of this kind. In any event, the damages-based agreement could be unenforceable: it is not unknown for an agreement to provide for a 25% share of personal injury damages without credit being given for the costs to be

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll