Crumpler & Anor (Liquidators Of Peak Hotels And Resorts Ltd v Candey Limited

Crumpler & Anor (Liquidators Of Peak Hotels And Resorts Ltd v Candey Limited

The appropriate basis for valuing Candey's post-21 October 2015 legal services is a time cost basis, not a fixed fee, contingency, or funding model. The hourly rates to be applied are those previously agreed between Candey and PHRL. Only time properly evidenced and spent for PHRL's benefit is to be included, with reductions for inadequately evidenced, bulk, or unauthorised time. Late evidence from Candey on additional unrecorded time is excluded; relief from sanctions is refused.

Parties
Applicants: Russell Crumpler and Christopher Farmer (Joint Liquidators of Peak Hotels and Resorts Limited); Respondent: Candey Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Insolvency Application (valuation of Legal Services Under S245 Insolvency Act 1986) / Remitted Hearing on Valuation Issue After Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Application allowed in part. The value of Candey's services is to be determined on a time cost basis at the agreed hourly rates, subject to reductions as set out in the judgment. Late evidence from Candey is excluded.
Legal Topics
Valuation of Legal Services, Floating Charges, Solicitor Remuneration, Damages Based Agreements, Conditional Fee Agreements, Litigation Funding, Solicitors Act 1974, Insolvency Act 1986 S245
Insolvency Law Legal Costs Cross Border Insolvency Valuation of Legal Services Floating Charges Solicitor Remuneration Damages Based Agreements Conditional Fee Agreements +3 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Russell Crumpler and Christopher Farmer (Joint Liquidators of Peak Hotels and Resorts Limited)

Applicants

Candey Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Insolvency Application (valuation of Legal Services Under S245 Insolvency Act 1986) / Remitted Hearing on Valuation Issue After Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the value of legal services supplied by Candey to PHRL after 21 October 2015 for the purposes of s245 Insolvency Act 1986?
  2. 2 What is the correct basis for valuing those services: time cost, fixed fee, contingency, or funding agreement?
  3. 3 What hourly rates and time entries are properly chargeable?

Ratio Decidendi

The appropriate basis for valuing Candey's post-21 October 2015 legal services is a time cost basis, not a fixed fee, contingency, or funding model. The hourly rates to be applied are those previously agreed between Candey and PHRL. Only time properly evidenced and spent for PHRL's benefit is to be included, with reductions for inadequately evidenced, bulk, or unauthorised time. Late evidence from Candey on additional unrecorded time is excluded; relief from sanctions is refused.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part. The value of Candey's services is to be determined on a time cost basis at the agreed hourly rates, subject to reductions as set out in the judgment. Late evidence from Candey is excluded.

Orders

  • Parties to agree the valuation figure applying the principles in the judgment.
  • If not agreed, parties to submit proposed declarations and a further short hearing to finalise the order.