Brennan v Associated Asphalt Ltd. [2006] EWHC 90052 (Costs) (18 May 2006)

Brennan v Associated Asphalt Ltd. [2006] EWHC 90052 (Costs) (18 May 2006)

Although there was a breach of Regulation 3(1)(b) because the CFA did not specify the postponement element, the breach was not material as it did not adversely affect client protection or the administration of justice. Therefore, the CFA is enforceable and the reasonable and proportionate costs under it are recoverable.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 90052 (Costs)
Parties
Claimant: Jill Brennan; Defendant: Associated Asphalt Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Costs Assessment / Preliminary Issue in Detailed Assessment Proceedings
Outcome
CFA enforceable; costs recoverable.
Legal Topics
Conditional Fee Agreements, Success Fees, Enforceability of Cfas, Regulatory Compliance
Civil Procedure Costs Law Conditional Fee Agreements Success Fees Enforceability of Cfas Regulatory Compliance

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jill Brennan

Claimant

Associated Asphalt Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Assessment / Preliminary Issue in Detailed Assessment Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant's Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA) is unenforceable due to breach of Regulation 3(1)(b) of the Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000 for failing to specify how much of the success fee relates to postponement of payment of fees and expenses.
  2. 2 Whether any breach is material and affects enforceability.
  3. 3 Whether a deed of rectification can cure any defect in the CFA.

Ratio Decidendi

Although there was a breach of Regulation 3(1)(b) because the CFA did not specify the postponement element, the breach was not material as it did not adversely affect client protection or the administration of justice. Therefore, the CFA is enforceable and the reasonable and proportionate costs under it are recoverable.

Court Disposition

CFA enforceable; costs recoverable.

Orders

  • The CFA is, in principle, enforceable.
  • Reasonable and proportionate costs under the CFA are recoverable.