Long, Miller and Mullins v. Sawchuk

Long, Miller and Mullins v. Sawchuk

The Court concluded the contingency fee agreement (25%) was not unfair or unreasonable at the time it was entered into and should be confirmed; the solicitor is entitled to the 25% contingency on the $490,000 trial award and to 25% of interest generated on that sum; the Master correctly found the appeal was not governed by the contingency and properly assessed $30,000 on a quantum meruit for the appeal; the Master lacked jurisdiction to award double costs under Rule 37 in taxations under the Legal Profession Act and the double costs order was set aside.

Citation
2002 BCSC 542
Parties
Appellant Solicitors: Long, Miller; Appellant Counsel: Norman D. Mullins, Q.C.; Respondent Beneficiary: Corinne Sawchuk
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal of Registrar's Taxation and Review Under the Legal Profession Act Arising From Wills Variation Act Litigation / Final Judgment on Appeal to Supreme Court of British Columbia (judgment)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part and dismissed in part: Master's modification of contingency reduced to 20% set aside; contingency confirmed at 25%; solicitor entitled to 25% of the $490,000 trial award and 25% of interest on that sum; Master's $30,000 quantum meruit fee for the appeal upheld; Master's double costs order...
Legal Topics
Contingency Fee Agreements, Taxation of Solicitor's Bill, Quantum Meruit, Double Costs / Rule 37, Wills Variation Act, Interest on Awards
Source Language
English
Legal Profession / Fee Regulation Wills and Estates Civil Procedure / Costs Appeal Law Contingency Fee Agreements Taxation of Solicitor's Bill Quantum Meruit Double Costs / Rule 37 +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Long, Miller

Appellant Solicitors

Norman D. Mullins, Q.C.

Appellant Counsel

Corinne Sawchuk

Respondent Beneficiary

Procedural Posture

Appeal of Registrar's Taxation and Review Under the Legal Profession Act Arising From Wills Variation Act Litigation / Final Judgment on Appeal to Supreme Court of British Columbia (judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the registrar/Master erred in finding the contingency fee agreement unreasonable and reducing 25% to 20%
  2. 2 Whether the contingency fee should apply to interest recovered on the trial award
  3. 3 Whether the solicitor's accounts should be reviewed under the Legal Profession Act and what fee is proper

Ratio Decidendi

The Court concluded the contingency fee agreement (25%) was not unfair or unreasonable at the time it was entered into and should be confirmed; the solicitor is entitled to the 25% contingency on the $490,000 trial award and to 25% of interest generated on that sum; the Master correctly found the appeal was not governed by the contingency and properly assessed $30,000 on a quantum meruit for the appeal; the Master lacked jurisdiction to award double costs under Rule 37 in taxations under the Legal Profession Act and the double costs order was set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part and dismissed in part: Master's modification of contingency reduced to 20% set aside; contingency confirmed at 25%; solicitor entitled to 25% of the $490,000 trial award and 25% of interest on that sum; Master's $30,000 quantum meruit fee for the appeal upheld; Master's double costs order...

Orders

  • Modify Master's order: do not reduce contingency; confirm contingency fee at 25%
  • Solicitor entitled to 25% of the $490,000 trial award and 25% of interest generated on that sum