Galitzky v Vizards Wyeth (A Firm)

Galitzky v Vizards Wyeth (A Firm)

The conditional fee agreement was not exempt under regulation 3A because the client was liable for disbursements and expenses regardless of recovery. There was no breach of regulations 2(1), 4(2)(a), or 4(2)(c) as the agreement sufficiently specified the circumstances of liability and adequate enquiries were made regarding insurance. The success fee of 75% was unreasonable given the high likelihood of success; a 25% success fee was appropriate.

Parties
Claimant: Davide Galitzky; Defendant: Vizards Wyeth (a firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Costs Assessment / Judgment on Preliminary Issues in Detailed Assessment of Costs
Outcome
Conditional fee agreement enforceable; success fee reduced
Legal Topics
Conditional Fee Agreements, Professional Negligence, Costs Assessment, Success Fee, Regulatory Compliance
Civil Procedure Costs Conditional Fee Agreements Professional Negligence Costs Assessment Success Fee Regulatory Compliance

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Davide Galitzky

Claimant

Vizards Wyeth (a firm)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Costs Assessment / Judgment on Preliminary Issues in Detailed Assessment of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conditional fee agreement is subject to regulation 3A of the Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000
  2. 2 Whether there was any breach of the 2000 Regulations by the Claimant’s solicitors
  3. 3 If so, whether any breach was material and rendered the agreement unenforceable

Ratio Decidendi

The conditional fee agreement was not exempt under regulation 3A because the client was liable for disbursements and expenses regardless of recovery. There was no breach of regulations 2(1), 4(2)(a), or 4(2)(c) as the agreement sufficiently specified the circumstances of liability and adequate enquiries were made regarding insurance. The success fee of 75% was unreasonable given the high likelihood of success; a 25% success fee was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Conditional fee agreement enforceable; success fee reduced

Orders

  • Conditional fee agreement between Claimant and solicitors is enforceable
  • Success fee allowed at 25% instead of 75%