Home / Dispute Resolution / Costs and funding / Funding arrangements

Legal News

Invalid Conditional Fee Agreement costs solicitors dear (Diag Human v Volterra Fietta)

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

Published on: 12 August 2022

Published by a LexisNexis Dispute Resolution expert

Table of contents

What are the practical implications of this case?
What was the background?
What did the court decide?
Case details

Article summary

Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court upheld Master Rowley’s decision that: (a) terms which made a Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA) non-compliant could not be severed so as to leave an enforceable retainer; (b) the solicitors were not entitled to remuneration on a quantum meruit basis for work done; and (c) in spite of there being no claim by the client for a restitutions remedy, the sums already paid by the client must be repaid. Written by Victoria Morrison-Hughes, director, costs lawyer at Integral Legal Costs.

Popular documents

Pre-action—costs recovery

Pre-action—costs recoveryThis Practice Note considers the recovery of costs incurred pre-action. It sets out provisions in the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981), CPR 44, pre-action protocols and court guides. It notes the provisions for civil cases that come within the fixed costs regime on or after

Summary assessment—principles

Summary assessment—principlesThis Practice Note explains what a summary assessment of costs is and sets out the key principles to understanding summary assessment, ie when summary assessment can be sought, the circumstances in which summary assessment will not take place and which members of the

Injunctions—costs recovery

Injunctions—costs recoveryThis Practice Note considers the costs position following an application for an interim injunction, the general approach taken by the courts and in what circumstances there will be a departure from the general position. This Practice Note also considers the court’s approach

Costs budgeting—completing Precedent T (particulars for varying a costs budget)

Costs budgeting—completing Precedent T (particulars for varying a costs budget)This Practice Note provides assistance in completing Precedent T. This is the court form that the parties are required to use when seeking party agreement, and/or court approval for a change to their agreed/approved