Farrar & Anor v Miller [2021] EWHC 1950 (Ch) (16 July 2021)

Farrar & Anor v Miller [2021] EWHC 1950 (Ch) (16 July 2021)

The assignment of Mr Farrar's claim to Candey Limited is void for champerty because it is not sanctioned by the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, transfers control of litigation to a solicitor with no legitimate interest beyond fee recovery, and undermines the purity of justice; statutory protection applies only to compliant CFAs and DBAs, and the assignment does not qualify.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 1950 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant (assignor for the Purposes of This Application): Peter Farrar (deceased); Intended Claimant (applicant and Assignee for the Purposes of This Application): Candey Limited; Defendant (respondent for the Purposes of This Application): David Charles Lawson Miller
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Substitution of Claimant and Validity of Assignment / Pre Trial, Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application refused; assignment declared void for champerty.
Legal Topics
Champerty, Maintenance, Assignment of Claims, Access to Justice, Conditional Fee Agreements, Damages Based Agreements
Civil Procedure Insolvency Legal Profession Champerty Maintenance Assignment of Claims Access to Justice Conditional Fee Agreements +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Farrar (deceased)

Claimant (assignor for the Purposes of This Application)

Candey Limited

Intended Claimant (applicant and Assignee for the Purposes of This Application)

David Charles Lawson Miller

Defendant (respondent for the Purposes of This Application)

Procedural Posture

Application for Substitution of Claimant and Validity of Assignment / Pre Trial, Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is the assignment of Mr Farrar's claim to Candey Limited void for champerty?
  2. 2 Does the assignment improve access to justice or undermine the purity of justice?
  3. 3 Is the assignment protected by statutory provisions for CFAs or DBAs?

Ratio Decidendi

The assignment of Mr Farrar's claim to Candey Limited is void for champerty because it is not sanctioned by the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, transfers control of litigation to a solicitor with no legitimate interest beyond fee recovery, and undermines the purity of justice; statutory protection applies only to compliant CFAs and DBAs, and the assignment does not qualify.

Court Disposition

Application refused; assignment declared void for champerty.

Orders

  • Candey Limited not to be substituted for Mr Farrar as claimant.
  • Cause of action remains vested in Mr Farrar; assignment is void and of no effect.