header-logo header-logo

The end of champerty?

14 April 2011 / Mark James
Issue: 7461 + 7462 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Mark James considers where a recent Court of Appeal ruling leaves the doctrine of champerty

Can a solicitor provide his own client with an indemnity against the client’s contingent liability to pay the other side’s costs in contentious business or does such an indemnity render the entire retainer void for champerty? Cases at first instance (Dix v Townend [2008] EWHC 90117 and Lewis v Tenants Distribution Limited [2010] EWHC 90161 (Costs)) reached different conclusions. The issue reached the Court of Appeal in Morris v Southwark LBC [2011] EWCA Civ 25, [2011] All ER (D) 183 (Jan).

Morris was a landlord and tenant case against a social landlord for disrepair to the claimant’s home. The claim settled for £10,000 compensation plus an agreement by the council to carry out the necessary repairs and pay costs. There was a conditional fee agreement (CFA) (ie, a “no win no fee” agreement) with a 10% success fee and an indemnity-against-other-side’s costs (IAOSC). Legal aid is

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 dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
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
back-to-top-scroll