Master Brown rejected the lay customer`s assertion that it is a commercially contentious contract if the agreement is not treated as a request for payment. In addition, it has been found that certain agreements between lawyers and their clients do not fall within the scope of Section 59 of the Solicitors Act 1974. He went on to say that if it was wrong, and the deal was a controversial business deal, then it was fair and reasonable and should not be set aside. (a) is a party to the agreement or to the representative of such a party; Or, the Tribunal found that the Conditional Fee Agreement was a contentious commercial agreement, as it met the definition of section 59 (1) of the Solicitors Act 1974, since it was a lawyers` compensation agreement and an hourly rate was set, so that the compensation was set at an hourly rate. If the court finds that the agreement is fair and reasonable, then it can be implemented and, if not, the case will be subject to a detailed cost assessment. 5. Where the amount agreed to in the context of a disputed commercial contract is paid by or on behalf of the customer or a person authorized to do so, the payment sender may at any time, within 12 months of the date of payment or within the appropriate time frame, and if the court appears to have heard the particular circumstances of the case require a reopening in circumstances that may be fair. , the court can reopen it and assess the costs covered by the agreement and have it reimburse all or part of the sum received by the lawyer… This is another example for the courts considering the fairness of a result to the layperson, but in that case the court found that the agreement was more advantageous to the client than the solicitor. It is clear that Master Brown is seriously considering this and that he has been seriously considered the fact that the lay client was advised to obtain independent legal advice that he did and that he was considered a demanding client. 20. The Tribunal`s investigation is therefore “focused on whether the agreement was fair and reasonable”: Lord Alverstone CJ in the same case, 372. The plaintiff lawyers opened proceedings in part 7 proceedings for the funds they said were due as part of a conditional royalty agreement.

One of the questions was whether the CFA was a contentious business agreement. 3. A client does not have the right to recover from another person, as part of a decision, the payment of costs on which a disputed business contract relates more than the amount he must pay to his lawyer for those costs as part of the agreement.