Holmes v Alfred McAlpine Homes (Yorkshire) Ltd

The backdating of the agreement did not involve a material breach of the Regulations and there was no breach in relation to the inclusion of the uplift; therefore, the CFA is enforceable.

Parties: Claimant: John Holmes; Defendant: Alfred McAlpine Homes (Yorkshire) Ltd
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 07 February 2006
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Judgment
Outcome: Appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Conditional Fee Agreements, Regulatory Compliance, Materiality of Breach

Civil Procedure Costs Conditional Fee Agreements Regulatory Compliance Materiality of Breach

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

John Holmes

Claimant

Alfred McAlpine Homes (Yorkshire) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether breaches of the Conditional Fee Agreement Regulations rendered the CFA unenforceable
2 Whether the backdating of the CFA and inclusion of a success fee were adequately explained to the client
3 Whether any breach was material to client protection or administration of justice

Ratio Decidendi

The backdating of the agreement did not involve a material breach of the Regulations and there was no breach in relation to the inclusion of the uplift; therefore, the CFA is enforceable.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

Conditional Fee Agreement is enforceable
Costs to be assessed accordingly