Non-payment of court fee does not mean time continues to run for limitation purposes thetimes.co.uk - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from thetimes.co.uk Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Zuberi v Lexlaw, a top costs QC confirmed
last week.
Nicholas Bacon QC, who acted for the Bar Council as intervener in
Lexlaw, said the ruling would allow ‘greater flexibility’ in DBA arrangements, which is what the government had wanted.
He said: ‘Any solicitor doing DBA work should certainly include provision now in the agreement that allows them to be paid something for the case if the client terminates the agreement, or the client breaches it. That is solid, sound, safe territory now… But those who are more adventurous, who might well be doing a whole basket of DBA cases, may well want to put in a clause that says, “if we lose, we’re going to be paid, say, half an hourly rate or a discounted fee”, on the back of that judgment’.
Subscription Notification
We have noticed that there is an issue with your subscription billing details. Please update your billing details here
Please update your billing information
The subscription details associated with this account need to be updated. Please update your billing details here to continue enjoying your subscription.
Your subscription will end shortly
Please update your billing details here to continue enjoying your access to the most informative and considered journalism in the UK.
Requirement that overseas visitors pay up front for NHS treatment not ultra vires thetimes.co.uk - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from thetimes.co.uk Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Lord Justice Lewison, Lord Justice Newey and Lord Justice Coulson dismissed the appeal in
Zuberi v Lexlaw Limited and said that London firm Lexlaw should be paid around £125,000 costs for work on a claim against a bank. Its client, Shaista Zuberi, had sought to terminate the DBA before the case concluded, withholding any payment on the basis it was unenforceable.
The High Court held that the DBA was not unenforceable as that would be wholly inconsistent with the parliament’s intent when it extended the scope of these agreements to civil litigation in 2013. The Court of Appeal made clear that termination fees are not caught by the DBA regulations, in a ruling that could open the way for many more cases to be funded through this method.