Hibberd v Fawcett Old Ltd & Anor

Leigh Day & Co did not have an interest within the meaning of the Regulations in recommending the Accident Line Protect policy; the benefits of scheme membership were peripheral and did not amount to a material or declarable interest requiring disclosure.

Parties: Claimant: Yvonne Hibberd; First Defendant: Fawcett Old Limited (formerly Bare Necessity Limited); Second Defendant: Michael Jane Hair & Beauty
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 17 March 2008
Procedural Posture: Costs Assessment / Detailed Assessment of Costs
Outcome: Conditional Fee Agreement enforceable; Claimant's costs recoverable.
Legal Topics: Conditional Fee Agreements, Insurance, Solicitor's Interest Disclosure, Client Protection

Civil Procedure Costs Conditional Fee Agreements Insurance Solicitor's Interest Disclosure Client Protection

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8

Parties

Yvonne Hibberd

Claimant

Fawcett Old Limited (formerly Bare Necessity Limited)

First Defendant

Michael Jane Hair & Beauty

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Assessment / Detailed Assessment of Costs

Legal Issues

1 Did Leigh Day & Co have an interest in recommending the Accident Line Protect policy?
2 Was that interest declared to the Claimant?
3 If not declared, did this amount to a material breach of Regulation 4(2)(e)(i) and (ii) of the Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000?

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Conditional Fee Agreement enforceable; Claimant's costs recoverable.

Orders

Detailed assessment of costs proceeds; Claimant's costs in the sum of £40,000 recoverable from Second Defendant.
No order as to costs against First Defendant.