BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions >> Lisa Jones v Richard Slade And Company Ltd [2022] EWHC 1968 (QB) (27 July 2022) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2022/1968.html Cite as: [2022] WLR(D) 334, [2023] 1 WLR 383, [2023] WLR 383, [2022] Costs LR 1191, [2022] EWHC 1968 (QB) |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Buy ICLR report: [2023] 1 WLR 383] [View ICLR summary: [2022] WLR(D) 334] [Help]
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ON APPEAL FROM THE SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE
MASTER ROWLEY, COSTS JUDGE
SCCO Ref: SC-2021-APP-00714
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
LISA JONES | Claimant/Respondent |
|
- and - |
||
RICHARD SLADE AND COMPANY LTD | Defendant/Appellant |
____________________
Benjamin Williams QC (instructed by Richard Slade and Company Ltd) for the Defendant/Appellant
Hearing date: 20 July 2022
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Mr Justice Johnson :
Background
"…There is clear evidence of unconscionable conduct by [RSC] such that [Ms Jones] did not enter into the agreement of her own free will.
[RSC] is unable to rebut this by reference to any independent advice given to [Ms Jones] prior to entering into the agreement.
In the alternative, [Ms Jones] contends that the agreement was reached following illegitimate pressure and economic duress and but for such tactics [Ms Jones] would not have entered into the agreement. [Ms Jones] did not consider any alternative course of action was available to her but to agree to [RSC's] demands.
Consequently, the Court is invited to set aside the transaction."
Judge Rowley's judgment
Submissions
RSC's case
Ms Jones' case
The statutory scheme
"Assessment on application of party chargeable or solicitor
(1) Where before the expiration of one month from the delivery of a solicitor's bill an application is made by the party chargeable with the bill, the High Court shall, without requiring any sum to be paid into court, order that the bill be assessed and that no action be commenced on the bill until the assessment is completed.
…
(5) An order for the assessment of a bill made on an application under this section by the party chargeable with the bill shall, if he so requests, be an order for the assessment of the profit costs covered by the bill.
(6) Subject to subsection (5), the court may under this section order the assessment of all the costs, or of the profit costs, or of the costs other than profit costs and, where part of the costs is not to be assessed, may allow an action to be commenced or to be continued for that part of the costs.
(7) Every order for the assessment of a bill shall require the costs officer to assess not only the bill but also the costs of the assessment and to certify what is due to or by the solicitor in respect of the bill and in respect of the costs of the taxation."
Were the points of claim a "statement of case" which was liable to strike out under CPR 3.4?
The scope of the preliminary issue
Is there jurisdiction to set aside the agreement under section 70 of the 1974 Act?
Outcome