Fosberry v HM Revenue & Customs [2007] EWHC 3344 (Ch) (25 May 2007)

Fosberry v HM Revenue & Customs [2007] EWHC 3344 (Ch) (25 May 2007)

The CFA was non-compliant in three material respects: failure to provide for reduction of fees if agreed with the litigation counterparty, failure to specify the element of the success fee attributable to delay in payment, and failure to specify clearly what payment was due on termination. These shortcomings, individually and collectively, prevented substantial compliance with the regulations and rendered the CFA unenforceable.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 3344 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Fosberry; Defendant: HM Revenue & Customs; Interested Party: BJ Rice & Associates
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Costs Assessment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs Assessment, Consumer Protection, VAT Tribunal Procedure
Civil Procedure Costs Conditional Fee Agreements Costs Assessment Consumer Protection VAT Tribunal Procedure

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fosberry

Claimant

HM Revenue & Customs

Defendant

BJ Rice & Associates

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Costs Assessment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conditional fee agreement (CFA) complied with the Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000 and was enforceable
  2. 2 Whether failures in the CFA were material and rendered it unenforceable

Ratio Decidendi

The CFA was non-compliant in three material respects: failure to provide for reduction of fees if agreed with the litigation counterparty, failure to specify the element of the success fee attributable to delay in payment, and failure to specify clearly what payment was due on termination. These shortcomings, individually and collectively, prevented substantial compliance with the regulations and rendered the CFA unenforceable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is rejected; the CFA is unenforceable; no costs are recoverable from HMRC by the Claimant or BJ Rice & Associates.