Candey Limited v Stephen Finnan
[2023] EWHC 3261 (SCCO)
Stephen John Finnan v Candey Ltd
19 August 2024
[2024] EWHC 2157 (Ch)
High Court
A client sued his former solicitors over a fee agreement. The court ruled the agreement was fair and the client had to pay, rejecting the client's arguments that the agreement was unclear or unfair.
Key Facts
- •Stephen Finnan (Appellant) appealed a costs order of £120,000 (inclusive of VAT) against his former solicitors, Candey Limited (Respondent).
- •The order stemmed from a Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA) dated March 6, 2018, concerning proceedings under s.994 Companies Act 2006.
- •The CFA stipulated a £60,000 payment on account and a further £40,000 upon success, with hourly rates also applicable.
- •The proceedings settled without a costs order, leading to the dispute over the CFA's interpretation and enforceability.
- •The appeal focused on the interpretation of the CFA, its classification as a 'contentious business agreement', and compliance with the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990.
Legal Principles
Interpretation of contracts; Construction of Conditional Fee Agreements (CFAs)
None explicitly stated, but derived from the judgment's analysis of the CFA.
Enforceability of contentious business agreements under the Solicitors Act 1974, s.61.
Solicitors Act 1974, s.61
Requirements for valid CFAs under the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, s.58.
Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, s.58
Admissibility of evidence in contract interpretation.
Whitworth Street Estates (Manchester) Ltd v James Miller & Partners Ltd [1970] A.C. 583
Standard of appellate review.
Implicit in the judgment's approach to the appeal.
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The court upheld the Costs Judge's decision, finding the CFA to be a valid and enforceable contentious business agreement. The court interpreted the CFA as not creating a success fee exceeding permissible limits under the 1990 Act and as not being unfair or unreasonable under the 1974 Act. The Appellant's liability was based on the agreed-upon sums rather than the hourly rates, which were secondary and ultimately waived.