Khans Solicitors v Chifuntwe & Anor [2012] EWHC 90220 (Costs) (17 February 2012)

Khans Solicitors v Chifuntwe & Anor [2012] EWHC 90220 (Costs) (17 February 2012)

There was no evidence that Mr Chifuntwe or SSHD acted to cheat Khans out of their costs or colluded to undermine Khans' interest. The compromise for £6,000 was valid as Mr Chifuntwe was acting in person after terminating Khans' retainer. The circumstances did not justify application of the rule in Re Margetson &...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 90220 (Costs)
Parties
Claimant: Khans Solicitors; First Defendant: Mr Chama Chifuntwe; Second Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim (costs Proceedings) / Judgment After Hearing on Application for Declarations and Payment Order
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Solicitor's Lien, Compromise of Costs, Charging Order Under Solicitors Act 1974, Detailed Assessment of Costs, Client Solicitor Relationship Termination
Civil Procedure Costs Law Solicitor's Lien Compromise of Costs Charging Order Under Solicitors Act 1974 Detailed Assessment of Costs Client Solicitor Relationship Termination

Source-derived case record

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khans Solicitors

Claimant

Mr Chama Chifuntwe

First Defendant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (costs Proceedings) / Judgment After Hearing on Application for Declarations and Payment Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the compromise of costs between the client and the opposing party, after termination of the solicitor's retainer, is binding and valid
  2. 2 Whether the solicitor is entitled to a charging order or lien over the costs recovered by the client
  3. 3 Whether there was a 'cheat' or collusion to deprive the solicitor of costs

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence that Mr Chifuntwe or SSHD acted to cheat Khans out of their costs or colluded to undermine Khans' interest. The compromise for £6,000 was valid as Mr Chifuntwe was acting in person after terminating Khans' retainer. The circumstances did not justify application of the rule in Re Margetson & Jones, and Khans were not entitled to a charging order or the relief sought.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Declarations sought in paragraphs (1) and (2) of the claim form refused
  • Order for payment of £6,000 refused