Blyth & Anor v Nelsons Solicitors Ltd [2019] EWHC 2063 (QB) (31 July 2019)

Blyth & Anor v Nelsons Solicitors Ltd [2019] EWHC 2063 (QB) (31 July 2019)

The appeal was dismissed because the Master was entitled to find, on the evidence, that no binding agreement to cap costs was made in June 2014, the claimants' evidence was confused and inconsistent, and the email of 5 August 2014 was not sufficiently clear or certain to constitute a contractual cap. The requirements for estoppel were not met, and the mediation agreement in March 2015 was a cap subject to detailed assessment, not a fixed compromise. There was no error of law or fact justifying appellate intervention.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2063 (QB)
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Jason Blyth; Claimant/appellant: Daniel Blyth; Defendant/respondent: Nelsons Solicitors Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Senior Courts Costs Office
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Solicitor Client Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Contract Formation, Estoppel, Detailed Assessment of Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Law Contract Law Solicitor Client Costs Conditional Fee Agreements Contract Formation Estoppel Detailed Assessment of Costs

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jason Blyth

Claimant/appellant

Daniel Blyth

Claimant/appellant

Nelsons Solicitors Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Senior Courts Costs Office

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding agreement was made to cap costs at the budgeted sum
  2. 2 Whether the defendant was estopped from recovering costs above the budget
  3. 3 Interpretation of alleged oral and written agreements regarding costs

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Master was entitled to find, on the evidence, that no binding agreement to cap costs was made in June 2014, the claimants' evidence was confused and inconsistent, and the email of 5 August 2014 was not sufficiently clear or certain to constitute a contractual cap. The requirements for estoppel were not met, and the mediation agreement in March 2015 was a cap subject to detailed assessment, not a fixed compromise. There was no error of law or fact justifying appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused on grounds 1, 4, and 5
  • Appeal dismissed on grounds 2 and 3