Germany v Flatman [2011] EWHC 2945 (QB) (10 November 2011)

Germany v Flatman [2011] EWHC 2945 (QB) (10 November 2011)

Where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a solicitor has stepped outside the ordinary role and become a funder of litigation 'in the way of business,' the court may order disclosure of funding arrangements to enable a potential third party costs application, subject to legal professional privilege. The trial judge erred by overestimating the policy impact on the CFA regime and setting too high a threshold for disclosure.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 2945
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Gill Germany; Respondent/claimant: Gavin Flatman; Appellant/defendant: Barchester Healthcare Limited; Respondent/claimant: Richard Weddall
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil, Personal Injury) / Appeal From County Court to High Court, Queen's Bench Division
Outcome
Appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Third Party Costs Orders, Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa), Disclosure of Funding Arrangements, Solicitor's Liability for Costs, Access to Justice, Public Policy in Litigation Funding
Civil Procedure Costs Personal Injury Third Party Costs Orders Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa) Disclosure of Funding Arrangements Solicitor's Liability for Costs Access to Justice +1 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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gill Germany

Appellant/defendant

Gavin Flatman

Respondent/claimant

Barchester Healthcare Limited

Appellant/defendant

Richard Weddall

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil, Personal Injury) / Appeal From County Court to High Court, Queen's Bench Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing disclosure of funding arrangements to enable potential third party costs applications against solicitors
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient basis to order disclosure where claimants were impecunious and solicitors may have funded litigation
  3. 3 Whether public policy or the CFA regime precludes such disclosure orders

Ratio Decidendi

Where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a solicitor has stepped outside the ordinary role and become a funder of litigation 'in the way of business,' the court may order disclosure of funding arrangements to enable a potential third party costs application, subject to legal professional privilege. The trial judge erred by overestimating the policy impact on the CFA regime and setting too high a threshold for disclosure.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed

Orders

  • Orders for disclosure of documents and/or information regarding funding arrangements granted, subject to legal professional privilege.
  • Costs order below to be reconsidered as appropriate.