Legal News

Assessing the consequences of funding changes for the award of solicitors’ fees (Yesil v Doncaster & Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust)

Assessing the consequences of funding changes for the award of solicitors’ fees (Yesil v Doncaster & Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust)
Published on: 30 March 2016
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Assessing the consequences of funding changes for the award of solicitors’ fees (Yesil v Doncaster & Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust)
  • Practical implications
  • What issues were in dispute at the costs hearing?
  • What is the relevance of the Court of Appeal decision in Simmons v Castle?
  • What submissions did the parties make?
  • Paying party
  • Receiving party
  • What ruling did the judge make on the recovery of additional liabilities?
  • How does this decision fit in with other recent developments in the costs area such as Ramos, Hyde and AH? Is there any common theme arising out of all these judgments?

Article summary

Dispute Resolution analysis: A regional costs judge has ruled that no success fee or After the Event (ATE) insurance premium can be recovered by solicitors where a client is given insufficient advice about the consequences of changing from legal aid to ‘no win, no fee’ funding. David Bowden, freelance independent consultant, talks to Alex Bagnall, associate and costs advocate at Just Costs Solicitors about what lessons can be learned from Master Mehmet Edem Yesil v Doncaster & Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents