Flatman v Germany

Flatman v Germany

Funding disbursements by solicitors under a CFA without ATE insurance, without more, does not make them liable to third party costs orders; however, disclosure of funding arrangements is justified where there is evidence of conduct outside the normal role of solicitor, such as pressing on with litigation contrary to client instructions.

Parties
Appellant: Gavin Flatman; Respondent: Gill Germany; Appellant: Richard Weddall; Respondent: Barchester Health Care Limited; Intervener: Law Society
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court and County Court
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Third Party Costs Orders, Conditional Fee Agreements, Disclosure, Solicitor Funding, After the Event Insurance
Civil Procedure Costs Personal Injury Third Party Costs Orders Conditional Fee Agreements Disclosure Solicitor Funding After the Event Insurance

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gavin Flatman

Appellant

Gill Germany

Respondent

Richard Weddall

Appellant

Barchester Health Care Limited

Respondent

Law Society

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court and County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether solicitors funding disbursements for claimants under CFAs without ATE insurance expose themselves to third party costs orders
  2. 2 Whether disclosure of funding arrangements should be ordered in personal injury cases where claimants are impecunious

Ratio Decidendi

Funding disbursements by solicitors under a CFA without ATE insurance, without more, does not make them liable to third party costs orders; however, disclosure of funding arrangements is justified where there is evidence of conduct outside the normal role of solicitor, such as pressing on with litigation contrary to client instructions.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Disclosure of funding arrangements ordered in both cases
  • Parties to exchange and lodge skeleton arguments on costs within 14 days, with 7 days to respond