Spencer-White v Harding Evans LLP [2017] EWCA Civ 434 (14 June 2017)

Spencer-White v Harding Evans LLP [2017] EWCA Civ 434 (14 June 2017)

Breach of the collateral assurance by the respondent did not entitle the appellant to repudiate the retainer or withhold fees; the respondent was contractually entitled to fees on a time-spent basis, and the lien over files was valid under the express terms of business.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] EWCA Civ 434
Parties
Appellant: Paul Spencer-White; Respondent: Harding Evans LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Solicitor Client Relationship, Lien Over Client Files, Collateral Contract, Fiduciary Duties, Misrepresentation, Assessment of Solicitors' Bills
Contract Law Professional Negligence Legal Ethics Solicitor Client Relationship Lien Over Client Files Collateral Contract Fiduciary Duties Misrepresentation +1 more

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Spencer-White

Appellant

Harding Evans LLP

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether breach of assurance by solicitors disentitled them to fees and lien over client files
  2. 2 Whether the retainer was an entire contract precluding recovery of fees on abortive transaction
  3. 3 Whether breach of fiduciary duty or misrepresentation occurred

Ratio Decidendi

Breach of the collateral assurance by the respondent did not entitle the appellant to repudiate the retainer or withhold fees; the respondent was contractually entitled to fees on a time-spent basis, and the lien over files was valid under the express terms of business.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for respondent for £2,689.43 plus VAT
  • Judgment for appellant on counterclaims for £587.50, £1,023.12, and £75