header-logo header-logo

Lien refused

08 December 2011
Issue: 7493 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Solicitor has no more right to assert a lien to secure his fees than his client has to use the money

A solicitor has no more right to assert a lien to secure his fees than his client has to use the money, the Court of Appeal has held.

In Withers v Langbar International [2011] EWCA Civ 1419, [2011] All ER (D) 22 (Dec) Withers’ clients, Rybak, had been sued by Langbar and settled for £30m, which was almost equal to Rybak’s worldwide assets. Under the settlement agreement, a property in Monaco would be sold and €7.6m paid from the proceeds to Langbar, regardless of the sale price. A court order provided that the proceeds would be paid into an escrow account.

The property sold for €13m, which left about €5m in the account.

Rybak started a new action concerning the settlement against Langbar, who counterclaimed. Langbar succeeded to the tune of €3.8m, plus €0.9m in costs. Rybak applied for an order that £400,000 be released from the account to pay Withers’ legal costs. Withers asserted a lien or equitable charge over the money in the account. The court held that Withers had a common law lien over the money claimed, but dismissed the claim that Withers had an equitable charge. Langbar appealed and Withers cross-appealed.

Langbar successfully argued that the money was in the account and would remain available subject to the court’s directions.

Upholding Langbar’s appeal, Lord Justice Lloyd said: “The solicitor can have no better right to assert a lien over the money than his client has to use the money for payment of the sums due to the solicitor…it was still necessary for the Rybaks to obtain the consent of Langbar to any withdrawal from the account of any sum to be paid out by way of legal expenses...That seems to me to make it impossible to contend that the money held in the account at that stage was available for payment of legal costs by the Rybaks. If it was not, then I do not see how it can have been subject to a lien to secure the payment of such costs on the part of Withers.”

Issue: 7493 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
Transferring anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing supervision to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) could create extra paperwork and increase costs for clients, lawyers have warned 
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
As he steps down as Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Julian Flaux reflects on over 40 years in law, citing independence, impartiality and integrity as guiding principles. In a special interview with Grania Langdon-Down for NLJ, Sir Julian highlights morale, mentorship and openness as key to a thriving judiciary
Dinsdale v Fowell is a High Court case entangling bigamy, intestacy and modern family structures, examined in this week's NLJ by Shivi Rajput of Stowe Family Law
back-to-top-scroll