Silvera v Bray Walker Solicitors (A Firm) & Ors

Silvera v Bray Walker Solicitors (A Firm) & Ors

The CFAs contained sufficient brief specification of reasons for the success fee percentage to comply with regulation 3(1)(a), and even if there was a literal breach, it was immaterial and did not render the agreements unenforceable.

Parties
Appellant: Carlo Moise Silvera; First Respondent: Bray Walker Solicitors (A Firm); Second Respondent: Bevans Bray Walker Limited (trading as Bevans)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Conditional Fee Agreements, Solicitors' Fees, Regulatory Compliance
Contract Law Civil Procedure Conditional Fee Agreements Solicitors' Fees 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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carlo Moise Silvera

Appellant

Bray Walker Solicitors (A Firm)

First Respondent

Bevans Bray Walker Limited (trading as Bevans)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conditional fee agreements (CFAs) are unenforceable for failing to briefly specify reasons for the success fee percentage as required by regulation 3(1)(a) of the Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000

Ratio Decidendi

The CFAs contained sufficient brief specification of reasons for the success fee percentage to comply with regulation 3(1)(a), and even if there was a literal breach, it was immaterial and did not render the agreements unenforceable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for claimants in the sum of £351,000 plus interest and costs
  • Frozen sum to be paid to claimants in partial satisfaction of liabilities