PI firms face deluge of costs claims after High Court ruling


Nick Lavender

Lavender: Solicitors owe clients fiduciary duty

Personal injury (PI) law firms that fail to spell out in their retainers the costs clients could be liable for beyond what is recovered from defendants face a wave of litigation following a landmark High Court ruling.

Even if they ultimately cap their recovery, this needs to be included in the retainer too.

Checkmylegalfees, which acts for the claimant in Belsner v Cam Legal Services Ltd [2020] EWHC 2755 (QB), said millions of clients may have claims a result.

Mr Justice Lavender’s ruling in what he recognised was a test case could end up in the Court of Appeal, as the firm – Norfolk firm CAM Legal – is seeking permission to appeal.

The story is reported in full on our sister site, Litigation Futures.




Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog


Katie McKenna

How is your internal weather today?

Like the weather, our feelings and perspectives change and undulate throughout the day. When you look outside, you get a snapshot of the world in that moment.


Anything else to say about SDLT?

SDLT is not stamp duty. This is something I have to say to firms too often. Whilst it has some of the same words in its name, it is not the former tax on property deeds that existed pre-December 2003.


Loading animation