Dean Menzies was awarded £275,000 in damages in 2019, from which his legal representatives Oakwood Solicitors—instructed to pursue the claim on a conditional fee basis—deducted a percentage for fees and charges, claiming Menzies agreed to these in advance via his contract for legal services. Menzies disagreed.
Ruling in Oakwood Solicitors Ltd v Menzies [2024] UKSC 34 this week, five Justices unanimously held Menzies had a right to have the bill assessed, on the grounds he had never agreed to the specific amount of deduction.
Delivering the lead judgment, Lord Hamblen said: ‘This emphasis on delivery highlights that the detail of the bill delivered, and the opportunity for the client to consider that detail, is of central importance... The client needs to have been informed of and have provided agreement to the amount in respect of which the solicitor intends to take payment pursuant to their bill.’
James Green, managing director of JG Solicitors Ltd, which represented Menzies in the case, said: ‘This judgment provides the vital clarity we have been seeking for both clients and solicitors on this issue.
‘This is a victory for consumer rights, and I'm delighted to see my client get justice in the Supreme Court.’
Green noted the decision clarifies that clients must give specific authorisation to a deduction amount before statutory time limits start running.
Jack Ridgway, Chair of the Association of Costs Lawyers, said: ‘Whatever your opinion on the outcome, it is good that the Supreme Court has provided clarity on level of consent needed before a solicitor can deduct their costs from a client’s damages.
‘Many law firms will now need to revise their retainers to ensure they still receive prompt payment while complying with the ruling. I’m sure they will quickly adapt.
‘It is, however, disappointing that the Supreme Court did not join the Court of Appeal’s call for the Solicitors Act 1974 to be updated—there is unanimous agreement across the costs world that the costs provisions are not fit for purpose in the modern era.’
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
