England and Wales High Court (Senior Courts Costs Office) Decisions

---

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Senior Courts Costs Office) Decisions >> Slatter v Ronaldsons (A Firm) [2002] EWHC 9015 (Costs) (14 December 2001)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Costs/2002/9015.html
Cite as: [2002] EWHC 9015 (Costs)

---

[New search] [Help]

---

This summary of a judgment has been obtained from the Supreme Court Costs Office pages on the HM Courts Service web site. The citation used by BAILII is not an officially approved citation. The full text of the judgment may have an official Neutral Citation issued by the court, and may be available elsewhere on BAILII.

 

 

 No.2 of 2002

Slatter v Ronaldsons (A Firm)
14 December 2001
Mr Justice Patten sitting without Assessors

Between 1994 and 1997 the defendant firm had acted for the claimant in matrimonial proceedings, the fee earner concerned being a legal executive a Mr B. Two bills were rendered by the defendants to the claimant on 27 March 1997 for £1,116.25, and on 13 April 1997 for £969.38. The defendants gave credit in relation to the first bill for £107.45, and there was evidence before the court that further payments had been made of £250 on account during 1997. The claimant however became unemployed, and the defendants concluded that it would be uneconomic to pursue him for the balance due on those two accounts, and accordingly "wrote them off" obtaining the appropriate VAT refund. Late in 2000 the claimant made a further payment of £500 on account to the defendants.

During 2001 the matrimonial proceedings were reactivated, and the claimant went back to Mr B, who by this time had left the defendants' employment and was working for another firm. On his behalf Mr B wrote to the defendants seeking delivery up of all relevant papers still retained by that firm. The defendants refused to hand over the papers, contending that they had a lien over the papers until their bills were discharged in full. The Costs Judge held that the contractual liability to pay the balance of the bills survived their "writing off", and that accordingly the defendants were entitled to rely on their lien, and not to hand over the documents sought without prior payment by the claimant of the sums due.

The claimant appealed, and a Judge in a wide ranging judgement considered the law relating to liens in general, and the applicability of those principles to the facts of this case in detail.