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

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

The trial judge misapplied the legal test by overestimating the policy impact on the CFA regime and setting too high a threshold for disclosure. Where there are reasonable grounds to suspect a solicitor has acted as a funder outside the ordinary role, disclosure may be ordered to enable an informed decision on a third party costs application. The appeals are allowed and disclosure is ordered, subject to privilege.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 2945 (QB)
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
Personal Injury Appeal / Appeal From Refusal of Disclosure Orders Regarding Funding Arrangements
Outcome
Appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Third Party Costs Orders, Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa), Disclosure of Funding Arrangements, Solicitor's Liability for Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Personal Injury Third Party Costs Orders Conditional Fee Agreements (cfa) Disclosure of Funding Arrangements Solicitor's Liability for 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 4 Authorities cited 20 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

Personal Injury Appeal / Appeal From Refusal of Disclosure Orders Regarding Funding Arrangements

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants are entitled to disclosure of information/documents regarding funding of unsuccessful personal injury claims by claimants' solicitors under CFA without ATE insurance
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge misapplied the legal test for ordering disclosure relevant to potential third party costs orders against solicitors

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge misapplied the legal test by overestimating the policy impact on the CFA regime and setting too high a threshold for disclosure. Where there are reasonable grounds to suspect a solicitor has acted as a funder outside the ordinary role, disclosure may be ordered to enable an informed decision on a third party costs application. The appeals are allowed and disclosure is ordered, subject to privilege.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed

Orders

  • Disclosure of documents and/or information regarding funding arrangements ordered, subject to legal professional privilege
  • Costs order below to be reconsidered as appropriate