header-logo header-logo

10 November 2011
Issue: 7489 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

New work for solicitors?

High Court ruling on the powers of insurers to veto a policy holder’s choice of lawyer could open up new avenues for solicitors

A High Court ruling on the powers of insurers to veto a policy holder’s choice of lawyer could open up new avenues for solicitors, says the Association of Costs Lawyers.

In Brown-Quinn & Anor v Equity Syndicate Management Ltd & Anor [2011] EWHC 2661 (Comm), Mr Justice Burton held that before-the-event (BTE) legal expenses insurers cannot stop policy holders instructing non-panel firms because the lawyers’ rates are higher than the prescribed rates set by
the insurer.

The case involved three employment and discrimination claims. The insurers contended that policy holders could instruct non-panel solicitors as long as they did not charge more than their prescribed rates of £125 and £139 per hour. However, the policy holders instructed Webster Dixon, which charged £274 for a partner or associate, £210 for a solicitor and £105 for a trainee.

Iain Stark, chairman of the Association of Costs Lawyers, says the ruling will give solicitors new opportunities to tender for work.

“The judgment doesn’t provide clarity [on what rates will be paid] but it does provide an opportunity,” he says.

At the same time, solicitors who discount the use of BTE because of the rates on offer and instead put clients on conditional fee agreements will have to change their approach and give the BTE option more consideration, he adds.

Issue: 7489 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll