Walker & Ors v Burton & Anor [2013] EWHC 811 (Ch) (19 April 2013)

Walker & Ors v Burton & Anor [2013] EWHC 811 (Ch) (19 April 2013)

The adjudicator erred in law by apportioning recoverable costs between CFA and non-CFA clients when only the CFA clients were contractually liable for the solicitors' fees. The indemnity principle precludes recovery by non-CFA clients who had no contractual liability. Apportionment is only appropriate where multiple clients are each liable for a share of the costs; here, only the CFA clients were liable, so no apportionment should have been made.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 811 (Ch)
Parties
Appellant (case 0394) / Respondent (case 0424): Eric Charles Walker; Appellant (case 0394) / Respondent (case 0424): Carole Ann Scott; Appellant (case 0394) / Respondent (case 0424): Christopher Balchin; Respondent (case 0394) / Appellant (case 0424): Peter Charles Burton; Respondent (case 0394) / Appellant (case 0424): Susan Anne Burton (formerly Bamford); Respondent (case 0424): Angela Walker; Respondent (case 0424): The estate of Elizabeth Chamberlin (represented by Carole Ann Scott); Respondent (case 0424): Edward Mills
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal (cross Appeals) From Costs Assessment / Judgment on Appeal From Deputy Adjudicator to HM Land Registry
Outcome
Appeal allowed (in favour of CFA clients); cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Apportionment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa), Indemnity Principle, Party and Party Costs, Retainer Agreements
Civil Procedure Costs Law Property Law Apportionment of Costs Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa) Indemnity Principle Party and Party Costs Retainer Agreements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eric Charles Walker

Appellant (case 0394) / Respondent (case 0424)

Carole Ann Scott

Appellant (case 0394) / Respondent (case 0424)

Christopher Balchin

Appellant (case 0394) / Respondent (case 0424)

Peter Charles Burton

Respondent (case 0394) / Appellant (case 0424)

Susan Anne Burton (formerly Bamford)

Respondent (case 0394) / Appellant (case 0424)

Angela Walker

Respondent (case 0424)

The estate of Elizabeth Chamberlin (represented by Carole Ann Scott)

Respondent (case 0424)

Edward Mills

Respondent (case 0424)

Procedural Posture

Appeal (cross Appeals) From Costs Assessment / Judgment on Appeal From Deputy Adjudicator to HM Land Registry

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator erred in apportioning recoverable costs between CFA and non-CFA clients
  2. 2 Whether the indemnity principle precludes recovery of costs by non-CFA clients
  3. 3 Whether a 50/50 apportionment of costs was legally justified

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator erred in law by apportioning recoverable costs between CFA and non-CFA clients when only the CFA clients were contractually liable for the solicitors' fees. The indemnity principle precludes recovery by non-CFA clients who had no contractual liability. Apportionment is only appropriate where multiple clients are each liable for a share of the costs; here, only the CFA clients were liable, so no apportionment should have been made.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed (in favour of CFA clients); cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The 50% apportionment of costs is set aside.
  • Costs are recoverable only by those contractually liable under the CFA.