Cunningham (June) v Seanna Fegan and Irene Fegan
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Stephens J |
| Judgment Date | 19 February 2015 |
| Neutral Citation | [2015] NIQB 14 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 19 February 2015 |
| Year | 2015 |
1
Neutral Citation No. [2015] NIQB 14 Ref: STE9554
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered: 19/02/2015
(subject to editorial corrections)*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
________
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
________
JUNE CUNNINGHAM
Plaintiff/Appellant:
v
SEANNA FEGAN and
IRENE FEGAN
Defendants/Respondents:
________
STEPHENS J
[1] The plaintiff applied in the county court for two orders. The first was an
order for discovery by the defendants of documents containing the fee arrangements
entered into between the defendants’ solicitor and the defendants’ insurance
company. The second was for an order that the defendants’ notice of intention to
defend should be struck out on the basis that the fee arrangement entered into
between Campbell Fitzpatrick now BLM Solicitors and the defendants’ insurance
company, Axa, was contrary to public policy. The learned county court judge
refused to strike out the defendants’ notice of intention to defend and considered
that any order for discovery was not necessary and accordingly refused to deal with
that application. The plaintiff appeals to this court against those orders in the
county court. Since the decision in the county court in this case I have given
judgment in another case which raised similar issues, see Baranowski v Rice [2014]
NIQB 122. In that other case I held that the fee arrangement between Campbell
Fitzpatrick/BLM Solicitors and Axa was contrary to public policy. Subsequently
Campbell Fitzpatrick/BLM Solicitors has entered into a new fee arrangement with
the defendant’s insurance company and redacted documents in relation to that new
fee arrangement have been made available to the plaintiff’s solicitors in this case.
There is no suggestion that the new fee arrangement is contrary to public policy.
The plaintiff’s solicitors have had access to the documents in relation to the new fee
arrangements. There is no need for an order for discovery. The new fee
To continue reading
Request your trial