Forde v Birmingham City Council

Forde v Birmingham City Council

CFA II is enforceable and not tainted by undue influence or lack of consideration. However, the success fee under CFA II is irrecoverable due to failure to serve the required notice under CPR 44.15(2). CFA I was terminated and replaced by CFA II and does not survive as a fallback. There was no material breach of Regulation 4 in the advice given to Miss Forde regarding public funding. McGrath is entitled to recover base costs under CFA II, subject to assessment, but not the success fee.

Parties
Claimant: Rose Forde; Defendant: Birmingham City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil (costs Assessment) / Preliminary Issues Determination on Enforceability of Conditional Fee Agreements and Costs Liability
Outcome
CFA II enforceable; success fee irrecoverable; base costs recoverable subject to assessment; CFA I does not survive.
Legal Topics
Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs Assessment, Undue Influence, Consideration, Retrospective Agreements, Regulatory Compliance, Success Fees
Civil Procedure Contract Law Legal Profession Regulation Conditional Fee Agreements Costs Assessment Undue Influence Consideration Retrospective Agreements +2 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 5 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rose Forde

Claimant

Birmingham City Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (costs Assessment) / Preliminary Issues Determination on Enforceability of Conditional Fee Agreements and Costs Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CFA II is unenforceable due to undue influence, lack of consideration, or retrospectivity
  2. 2 Whether a success fee under CFA II is recoverable
  3. 3 Whether CFA I survives if CFA II is unenforceable

Ratio Decidendi

CFA II is enforceable and not tainted by undue influence or lack of consideration. However, the success fee under CFA II is irrecoverable due to failure to serve the required notice under CPR 44.15(2). CFA I was terminated and replaced by CFA II and does not survive as a fallback. There was no material breach of Regulation 4 in the advice given to Miss Forde regarding public funding. McGrath is entitled to recover base costs under CFA II, subject to assessment, but not the success fee.

Court Disposition

CFA II enforceable; success fee irrecoverable; base costs recoverable subject to assessment; CFA I does not survive.

Orders

  • McGrath may recover base costs under CFA II, subject to detailed assessment.
  • No success fee is recoverable under CFA II.