Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Next Generation Holdings Limited & Anor v Alec Finch & Ors

[2024] EWHC 927 (Ch)
Two companies won a big lawsuit. They tried to get money the losing side's lawyers were holding. The lawyers said they deserved the money for unpaid legal bills (a 'lien'). The judge agreed the lawyers deserved some of the money, but not all. The winning companies got what was left over.

Key Facts

  • Claimants (Next and Ambon) obtained judgments against Defendants (Alec and Robert) for £6,124,430.02 plus interest, totaling £8,333,743.43.
  • Claimants applied for a third-party debt order against Ward Hadaway LLP (Ward Hadaway), Alec's solicitors, for monies in Ward Hadaway's client account originating from the sale of Alec's Italian property.
  • Ward Hadaway claimed a lien and/or set-off against the monies for unpaid legal fees (£450,665.36).
  • A worldwide freezing order was in place, preventing Alec from disposing of assets up to £10,000,000, with an exception for the sale proceeds of the Italian property which were to be paid into Ward Hadaway's client account.

Legal Principles

Monies in a solicitor's client account, where the solicitor's only obligation is to pay them to the client, constitute a debt owed to the client and can be subject to a third-party debt order.

Case law (implicitly referenced throughout the judgment)

A solicitor's lien is confined to fees due before service of the interim third-party debt order. Subsequent fees are subject to the order.

Case law (implicitly referenced and conceded by Ward Hadaway)

A solicitor's lien has priority over a third-party debt order if established. The court cannot override this priority.

BCS Corporate Acceptances Ltd v Taylor [2018] EWHC 2349 (QB) and Implicit in the judgment

To determine if a lien exists, the key question is whether the monies in the account are for general purposes or a particular purpose inconsistent with the lien. If the latter, no lien arises.

Withers LLP v Rybak and others [2012] 1 WLR 1748

A solicitor has a right of set-off over money in a client account for services rendered and for which a bill has been delivered.

BCS Corporate Acceptances Ltd v Taylor [2018] EWHC 2349 (QB)

A freezing order does not displace existing proprietary or other rights, including contractual or common law rights of set-off.

Implicit in the judgment and referenced in relation to Withers

Outcomes

Ward Hadaway has a lien over £47,000 (deposit) paid into their client account before the freezing order.

The money was paid without restrictions on its use, and the purpose was not inconsistent with a solicitor's lien.

No further lien exists over the balance of the Italian property proceeds.

The freezing order, once in place, made the funds held for a purpose inconsistent with a lien.

Ward Hadaway has a set-off of £386,417.36 against the proceeds in its client account for unpaid fees.

The retainer letter and terms of business established a contractual right of set-off, and a common law set-off exists, unaffected by the freezing order.

The interim third-party debt order is made final for £109,529.69.

This amount represents the remaining funds after accounting for the lien and set-off, and considering that funds paid into the account after the service of the interim order are not caught by it.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.