Hyde v Milton Keynes NHS Foundation Trust
Where a CFA is entered into in good faith and intended to supersede public funding, and there is no actual concurrency or topping up, the absence of formal discharge of the legal aid certificate does not render the CFA unlawful or unenforceable. Recovery of costs, including success fee and insurance premium, is permitted as a matter of substance, not form.
- Parties
- Claimant: Hyde; Defendant: Milton Keynes NHS Foundation Trust
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 23 May 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Legal Aid, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs Recovery, Access to Justice Act 1999
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Hyde
Claimant
Milton Keynes NHS Foundation Trust
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a claimant can recover costs, including success fee and insurance premium, under a CFA when a public funding certificate was not formally discharged
- 2 Whether the absence of formal discharge of a legal aid certificate renders a CFA unlawful or unenforceable
Ratio Decidendi
Where a CFA is entered into in good faith and intended to supersede public funding, and there is no actual concurrency or topping up, the absence of formal discharge of the legal aid certificate does not render the CFA unlawful or unenforceable. Recovery of costs, including success fee and insurance premium, is permitted as a matter of substance, not form.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Claimant entitled to recover costs, including success fee and insurance premium, under the CFA.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment