As any PI practitioner will know, solicitors’ success fees, previously recoverable from Defendants, can now only be recovered from their own clients’ general damages. In infant settlement cases, where any deduction from damages requires the permission of the Court, this poses particular problems.
Under CPR 21.12 and the associated Practice Direction, before any deduction in respect of costs can be made from a child’s damages award, the solicitor must file a witness statement from the Litigation Friend covering a series of matters, including the risk assessment used, why the funding model was employed, and what advice was given to the Litigation Friend about it.
In A v Royal Mail Group  EW Misc B24(CC) and B30(CC), the Regional Costs Judge for Birmingham, DJ Lumb, considered the approach which Courts should adopt when faced with these applications. In that case, which involved modest awards for children injured in a straightforward car accident, a witness statement had been filed by the solicitor and signed by the Litigation Friend. However, no copy of the risk assessment had been filed.
DJ Lumb said that “there were effectively no risks to insure against… when challenged by the Court to specify any risk that could justify taking out an ATE policy… [the solicitor’s agent] could not do so” (B24 at ). The Court refused to allow any ATE premiums to be deducted from the children’s damages.
Absent any risk assessment or details of the advice given to the Litigation Friend about the funding arrangement, the Court adjourned the matter to a detailed assessment – B30. At that hearing, it considered some of the general risks said often to be involved in these sorts of cases (at ), largely rejected them, and said that as the case was very low risk, the only success fee which would be deductible from the children’s damages was 10% ( – ).
This was a single case in a County Court, and as such is not, in principle, binding. However, it is the only recent detailed judicial consideration of the recovery of success fees in infant settlements, with a District Judge with great experience of costs matters delivering a reserved judgment on the subject. As such, it is likely to be followed by County Courts in run of the mill infant settlement cases up and down the country.
Ross Beaton / 8th Nov 2015
The information and any commentary on the law contained on this web site is provided free of charge for information purposes only. Every reasonable effort is made to make the information and commentary accurate and up to date, but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by any member of Chambers. The information and commentary does not, and is not intended to, amount to legal advice to any person on a specific case or matter. You are strongly advised to obtain specific, personal advice from a lawyer about your case or matter and not to rely on the information or comments on this site. No responsibility is accepted for the content or accuracy of linked sites.
If you like what you've read but want to know more about how we can help you, simply call us:
Alternatively you can send us an email and a member of our team will contact you as soon as possible.