Butt v Nizami

Butt v Nizami

In cases falling under CPR 45 Section II, entitlement to fixed recoverable costs and success fees does not depend on the existence of a valid and enforceable CFA, and the Indemnity Principle does not apply to these figures; only compliance with the conditions laid down under the Rules is required.

Parties
Defendant/appellant: Mohammed Butt; Claimant/respondent: Christi Nizami; Claimant/respondent: Cadhar Kamuluden
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Indemnity Principle, Conditional Fee Agreements, Fixed Recoverable Costs, Personal Injury, Road Traffic Accident
Civil Procedure Costs Indemnity Principle Conditional Fee Agreements Fixed Recoverable Costs Personal Injury Road Traffic Accident

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammed Butt

Defendant/appellant

Christi Nizami

Claimant/respondent

Cadhar Kamuluden

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether entitlement to fixed recoverable costs and success fees under CPR 45.9 and 45.11 depends on the existence of a valid and enforceable Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA)
  2. 2 Whether the Indemnity Principle applies to fixed recoverable costs and success fees in costs-only proceedings under CPR 45 Section II

Ratio Decidendi

In cases falling under CPR 45 Section II, entitlement to fixed recoverable costs and success fees does not depend on the existence of a valid and enforceable CFA, and the Indemnity Principle does not apply to these figures; only compliance with the conditions laid down under the Rules is required.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant's appeal in each case is dismissed