Spotlight

Forensic & Insurance News

Contributed by specialist insurance legal practice Berrymans Lace Mawer

Barlow v Perks

(Supreme Court Costs Office - 19 October 2007)

The claimant's motor insurers instructed KSB Claims to pursue a personal injury action on his behalf following a motorcycle accident. The claimant had the benefit of before-the-event insurance with Motor Law, who were subsequently taken over by The Accident Group.

KSB Law decided to wind up KSB Claims and the claim was transferred to Irwin Mitchell. It became apparent, following examination of the evidence and cross-examination of the Irwin Mitchell fee earner at the detailed assessment hearing, that Irwin Mitchell had advised that the claimant could continue by either funding the litigation personally or entering into a conditional fee agreement. The claimant entered into a CFA.

Irwin Mitchell did not advise that if he instructed a TAG panel firm, he could still have the benefit of the BTE insurance. Furthermore, they were aware that reg 6 of the Insurance Companies (Legal Expenses Insurance) Regulations 1990 would have enabled the claimant to compel the BTE insurers to allow Irwin Mitchell to run the case under the existing BTE policy but did not advise him of this.

As a consequence of Irwin Mitchell's advice to the claimants, the court found there had been a material departure from the requirements under reg 4 of the Conditional Fee Agreements 2000 Regulations to inform the client about the availability of insurance and other methods of financing the costs. The CFA was held unenforceable and Irwin Mitchell recovered no costs under it. In addition, Irwin Mitchell paid £10 500 towards the defendant's detailed assessment costs.

COMMENT

This case demonstrates that if claimant practitioners fail to adequately advise their clients about alternative methods of funding a case, they could pay a hard financial penalty. - Adam Lidster, BLM London.

The following law report contributed by specialist insurance practice Berrymans Lace Mawer first appeared in Post Magazine on 6 December 2007.

Disclaimer: The law report contains information of general interest about current legal issues, it does not present a complete or comprehensive statement of the law, nor does it constitute legal advice. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in any particular case.