Burke Law Corp. v. Reon Management Services Inc.

Burke Law Corp. v. Reon Management Services Inc.

Master concluded bills 1 to 9 were interim and therefore reviewable under the appointment; the solicitor failed to establish that the 1991 retainer was abandoned when he recommenced work in 1998 and therefore remained binding as to its applicable terms (paragraph 10 was frustrated by the 1999 tariff proclamation but the remainder of the agreement bound the solicitor).

Citation
2002 BCSC 557
Parties
Solicitor: Burke Law Corporation; Client: Reon Management Services Inc.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Solicitor's Bill Review / Costs Dispute / Hearing / Reasons for Decision (master as Registrar)
Outcome
Bills 1 to 9 are interim and reviewable; the May 31, 1991 retainer agreement remained binding as to applicable terms from spring 1998 until termination (paragraph 10 frustrated by tariff proclamation); bill 10 remains unpaid and treated as the final bill.
Legal Topics
Interim Vs Final Bill Review, Retainer Agreement Continuity, Tariff of Costs, Deduction of Legal Fees From Settlement Funds, Appointment for Review
Source Language
English
Solicitor and Client Costs and Taxation Contract Law Expropriation Law Civil Procedure Interim Vs Final Bill Review Retainer Agreement Continuity Tariff of Costs +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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Burke Law Corporation

Solicitor

Reon Management Services Inc.

Client

Procedural Posture

Solicitor's Bill Review / Costs Dispute / Hearing / Reasons for Decision (master as Registrar)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Which solicitor's bills can be reviewed pursuant to the appointment dated October 11, 2001
  2. 2 Whether bills 1 to 9 are final or interim
  3. 3 Whether the May 31, 1991 retainer agreement remained binding when solicitor resumed work in 1998

Ratio Decidendi

Master concluded bills 1 to 9 were interim and therefore reviewable under the appointment; the solicitor failed to establish that the 1991 retainer was abandoned when he recommenced work in 1998 and therefore remained binding as to its applicable terms (paragraph 10 was frustrated by the 1999 tariff proclamation but the remainder of the agreement bound the solicitor).

Court Disposition

Bills 1 to 9 are interim and reviewable; the May 31, 1991 retainer agreement remained binding as to applicable terms from spring 1998 until termination (paragraph 10 frustrated by tariff proclamation); bill 10 remains unpaid and treated as the final bill.

Orders

  • Bills 1 to 9 are declared interim accounts and are reviewable pursuant to the appointment dated October 11, 2001.
  • The May 31, 1991 retainer agreement remains binding as to applicable terms between the parties from spring 1998 until the solicitor ceased to act; paragraph 10 of that agreement was frustrated by the tariff proclamation.