British Waterways Board v Norman
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 26 October 1993 |
| Date | 26 October 1993 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
Queen's Bench Divisional Court
Before Lord Justice McCowan and Mr Justice Tuckey
Costs - solicitors' agreement with client unlawful - contingency fee
Where there was an agreement, express or implied, between solicitors and their client that the solicitors would look to the client for costs only in the event of the client succeeding under section 79 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, then the solicitors could not obtain an order that the other, losing party pay their costs.
The Queen's Bench Divisional Court so stated when allowing an appeal by way of case stated by the British Waterways Board against the decision on April 1, 1992 of West Bromwich Justices by which the board was ordered to pay to Rose Norman the sum of £8,963.99 pursuant to section 82(12) of the 1990 Act as the costs of proceedings brought by her against the board.
Section 82 of the 1990 Act provides: "(12) … the court shall order the defendant … to pay to the person bringing the proceedings such amount as the court considers reasonably sufficient to compensate him for any expenses properly incurred by him in the proceedings."
Mr Duncan Matheson, QC, for the applicants; Miss Elizabeth Norman for the respondent.
LORD JUSTICE McCOWAN said that it had been submitted by the applicants that given that the respondent was on income support and that there had been no legal aid available to her in her action against the board, there must have been an agreement, either express or implied, between the respondent and her solicitors that in bringing the case the latter would not in any circumstances look to her for any part of the costs.
In such circumstances, the respondent would not herself have incurred any liability for costs and accordingly there would be nothing upon which section 82(12) of the Act could properly bear.
His Lordship, in accepting the second contention of the applicants, said that in the circumstances of the case...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thai Trading v Taylor
...agreement. But he reluctantly concluded that he was bound by authority, in particular the decisions of the Divisional Court in British Waterways Board v Norman (1993) 22 HLR 232 and of Garland J in Aratra Potato Co Ltd v Taylor Johnson Garrett [1995] 4 All ER 695, to hold that the agreement......
-
Westlaw Services Ltd and Another v Boddy
...if he loses. It arises from his knowledge that in practice he will not be paid unless he wins. In my judgment the reasoning in British Waterways Board v Norman 26 HLR 232 is unsound. Accordingly, either it is improper for a solicitor to act in litigation for a meritorious client who cannot ......
- Aratra Potato Company Ltd v Taylor Joynson Garrett (A Firm)
-
Awwad v Geraghty & Company
...I question whether this should be regarded as contrary to public policy today, if indeed it ever was. 54 After referring to British Waterways Board v Norman 26 H.L.R. 232 (a decision of the Divisional Court and Aratra Potato Co Ltd v Taylor Joynson Garrett [1995] 4 All ER 695, a first insta......
-
ISSUES CONCERNING COMPLIANCE
...(181) SI 1993/1933. (182) Section 11. (183) Pursuant to the provisions of s. 3663 of Title 18, USC. (184) 517 US 1163(1996). (185) (1993) TLR 11 November. (186) SJ 16th.June, 1994, 587. (187) [1998] 3 All ER 65. (188) See Solicitors Practice Rule 15. (189) For example, much bankruptcy and i......
-
VITIATING FACTORS IN CONTRACT LAW — SOME KEY CONCEPTS AND DEVELOPMENTS
...n 338; and overruling Aratra Potato Co Ltd v Taylor Joynson Garrett (a firm)[1995] 4 All ER 695 and British Waterways Board v Norman(1993) 26 HLR 232. Contra now Hughes v Kingston upon Hull City Council[1999] 2 All ER 49 where the court refused to follow the Thai Trading case, inter alia, b......
-
Agreement for Costs on a Contingency Basis
...of which was successful. The issuewas whether, on that factual basis, the case came withinthedecision inBritish Waterways Board v Norman [1993] 26 HLR232.Subsequent to the magistrates' decision, there was reported in TheTimesthe Court of Appeal's decision in Thai Trading Company v Taylor (s......
-
Agreement for Costs on a Contingency Basis
...of which was successful. The issuewas whether, on that factual basis, the case came withinthedecision inBritish Waterways Board v Norman [1993] 26 HLR232.Subsequent to the magistrates' decision, there was reported in TheTimesthe Court of Appeal's decision in Thai Trading Company v Taylor (s......