Thornley v Ministry Of Defence [2010] EWHC 2584 (QB) (14 October 2010)

Thornley v Ministry Of Defence [2010] EWHC 2584 (QB) (14 October 2010)

There was no material breach of the Conditional Fee Agreement Regulations as BTE insurance was exhausted and the CFA was properly explained; entering into a CFA was reasonable in the circumstances; the success fee allowed by the Costs Judge was excessive and should be reduced to 15% for solicitors and 0% for counsel; hourly rates were high but within a permissible bracket except for travel, which should be allowed only at guideline rates; the assessment of time spent on documents was reasonable given the case complexity.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 2584 (QB)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Stewart Robert Thornley (a child, by his mother and litigation friend Lavinia Thornley); Defendant/appellant: Ministry of Defence
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Costs Appeal (detailed Assessment Following Settlement of Personal Injury Claim) / Appeal From Regional Costs Judge's Detailed Assessment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; success fee and travel costs reduced; all other grounds dismissed.
Legal Topics
Conditional Fee Agreements, Success Fees, Detailed Assessment of Costs, Hourly Rates, Travel Costs, BTE Insurance, Reasonableness of Costs
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Costs Conditional Fee Agreements Success Fees Detailed Assessment of Costs Hourly Rates Travel 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 Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stewart Robert Thornley (a child, by his mother and litigation friend Lavinia Thornley)

Claimant/respondent

Ministry of Defence

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Costs Appeal (detailed Assessment Following Settlement of Personal Injury Claim) / Appeal From Regional Costs Judge's Detailed Assessment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a material breach of the Conditional Fee Agreement Regulations 2000 (CFAR) rendering the CFA void
  2. 2 Whether it was reasonable to enter into a CFA after BTE insurance was exhausted
  3. 3 Whether the success fee awarded to solicitors and counsel was excessive

Ratio Decidendi

There was no material breach of the Conditional Fee Agreement Regulations as BTE insurance was exhausted and the CFA was properly explained; entering into a CFA was reasonable in the circumstances; the success fee allowed by the Costs Judge was excessive and should be reduced to 15% for solicitors and 0% for counsel; hourly rates were high but within a permissible bracket except for travel, which should be allowed only at guideline rates; the assessment of time spent on documents was reasonable given the case complexity.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; success fee and travel costs reduced; all other grounds dismissed.

Orders

  • Solicitors' success fee reduced to 15%.
  • Counsel's success fee reduced to 0%.