Metcalfe v Clipston [2004] EWHC 9005 (Costs) (06 April 2004)

Metcalfe v Clipston [2004] EWHC 9005 (Costs) (06 April 2004)

The Claimant is not precluded from recovering a success fee as notification of funding was not a mandatory requirement pre-issue under the applicable rules and protocols; the obligation was only recommended, not compulsory. However, the claimed 90% success fee is unreasonable given the early effective concession of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2004] EWHC 9005 (Costs)
Parties
Claimant: Claimant (unnamed); Defendant: Defendant (unnamed, former dentist)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Costs Assessment (clinical Negligence) / Detailed Assessment of Costs Following Settlement and 'costs Only' Proceedings
Outcome
Claimant entitled to recover a 20% success fee as part of costs; relief from sanctions not required; costs of preparing the bill allowed at £650 plus VAT; each party to bear own costs of the hearing, subject to further submissions.
Legal Topics
Conditional Fee Agreements, Success Fee Recoverability, Relief From Sanctions, Pre Action Protocols, Detailed Assessment of Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Law Clinical Negligence Conditional Fee Agreements Success Fee Recoverability Relief From Sanctions Pre Action Protocols Detailed Assessment of Costs

Source-derived case record

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant (unnamed)

Claimant

Defendant (unnamed, former dentist)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Assessment (clinical Negligence) / Detailed Assessment of Costs Following Settlement and 'costs Only' Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is the Claimant barred from recovering a success fee due to failure to notify the Defendant of the funding arrangement?
  2. 2 Should the Claimant be given relief from Court sanctions for breach of CPR 44.15?
  3. 3 If recoverable, is a 90% success fee appropriate?

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant is not precluded from recovering a success fee as notification of funding was not a mandatory requirement pre-issue under the applicable rules and protocols; the obligation was only recommended, not compulsory. However, the claimed 90% success fee is unreasonable given the early effective concession of liability and the straightforward nature of the case; a 20% success fee is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Claimant entitled to recover a 20% success fee as part of costs; relief from sanctions not required; costs of preparing the bill allowed at £650 plus VAT; each party to bear own costs of the hearing, subject to further submissions.

Orders

  • Claimant allowed a 20% success fee as additional liability.
  • Claimant allowed £650 plus VAT for costs of preparing the bill.