The owners of this site offer no guarantee or responsibility for the accuracy of
the information and views contained within the articles published on the site. By
using this site you agree to be bound by its Terms & Conditions.
1. The CCFA Regulations 2000 came into effect on 30th November 2000 by way
of s. 30 of the Access to Justice Act.
2. Some suggested that these regulations would not be fully operational until
the abolition of the indemnity principle but the point was later overcome when considered
in various cases by the appeal courts.
3. Under CCFA's membership organisations can take out block insurance or self-insure
to provide 'cover' to its members.
4. The point of a CCFA is basically to provide an indemnity for legal costs
of a member but the agreement is between the solicitor and the membership
5. In theory there is less explanation needed to a new client is required
than with an individual CFA.
6. There must evidence of an undertaking by membership organisation to pay
the client's costs including the opponent's costs if the case is lost or
even if there are any interlocutory adverse costs orders against the client
during the case.
This is likely to tie in with the principles of
R -v- Miller & Glennie
Davies -v- Taylor
Lewis -v- Avery
7. CCFA's were considered to be in the public interest and a consultation
paper was written as long ago as 7 years back in 1998.
8. Cases so far:
Gliddon -v- Maunder - January 2003
Master O' Hare said that there still has to be a valid retainer between the
solicitor and the client. The indemnity principle is not abrogated by the
Thornley -v- Lang  CA EWCA Civ 1484
GMB union matter. The union member was still liable for costs on the basis
of a CCFA. There needs to be some form of contract with the client.
The court rejected the submission that the member had in fact entered into
an individual CFA and should be subject to the CFA Regulations.
9. This is still a new area which is likely to attract more indemnity
10. Regulation 3 compliance is still recommended. It must be explained to
the client that they are ultimately liable to pay the costs.
11. s. 31 Access to Justice Act introduced the 'CFA-lite' or 'CFA-Simple' on 2nd
June 2003 which foregoes a number of the CFA Regulation information to be
given to clients and allows solicitors to be paid only what they recover
from the paying party. There have been difficulties with the draft of these
rules particularly with reference to whether CFA-lite's are limited to costs
recovered or sums recovered.
12. Premium 'equivalent' - between the parties an amount that would have
been paid for insurance against opponent's costs not in respect of the
solicitors' own costs.
JOHN KITCHEN -V- BURWELL REED & KINGHORN LIMITED  EWHC 1771 3rd August 2005
Regarding recoverability of success fee and whether there had been a breach of the
indemnity principle where the Claimant’s solicitors had been acting under a Collective
Conditional Fee Agreement.