Redden v. Morris
The adjudicator found parts of the account excessive due to lack of written retainer/budget, unreasonable charging for retainer discussions, and systematic use of .2 billing increments; accordingly reduced fees by specified amounts, deducted the paid $500 retainer, allowed disbursements and HST on allowed fees, and fixed the balance owing.
- Citation
- 2004 NSSM 14
- Parties
- Applicant: Stanton E. Redden; Respondent: James Morris
- Court
- Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 15 March 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Small Claims Court / Taxation Hearing (decision)
- Outcome
- Account allowed in part; fees reduced and balance fixed.
- Legal Topics
- Retainer and Billing, Fee Taxation, Fee Reasonableness, Foreclosure and Execution, Property Sale
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Stanton E. Redden
Applicant
James Morris
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Taxation Hearing (decision)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the solicitor's account was excessive and should be reduced
- 2 Whether charges for discussions about retainers and client disagreements are chargeable
- 3 Whether billing increments of .2 were unreasonable and inflated fees
Ratio Decidendi
The adjudicator found parts of the account excessive due to lack of written retainer/budget, unreasonable charging for retainer discussions, and systematic use of .2 billing increments; accordingly reduced fees by specified amounts, deducted the paid $500 retainer, allowed disbursements and HST on allowed fees, and fixed the balance owing.
Court Disposition
Account allowed in part; fees reduced and balance fixed.
Orders
- Fees reduced to $5,688.30
- Disbursements of $749.00 allowed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment