Belsner v Cam Legal Services


Why should a case about the minimal costs of a minor RTA raise any interest at all?

Yet the recent decision of Lavender J in Belsner v Cam Legal [2020] EWHC 2755 has attracted much comment since it was handed down on 16th October 2020.

Dan Stacey examines the case which considered CPR 46.9, fiduciary duties, fixed costs and the Law Society Conditions before holding that a client should provide “informed consent” to her costs liability before being liable to pay the difference between what she could recover from the defendant in litigation and what she was contractually liable to pay her solicitors.