The High Court directed Daniel J. O’Gorman to release Lucy Carr’s personal injury file to any new solicitors she retains, subject to their undertaking to seek recovery of his costs and outlays from any settlement or court award and pass on any sums received. The order did not require Carr to pay the €1,337.50 outlay before the file is released.
Ms Justice Faherty delivered the judgment on 28 April 2017 in proceedings brought by special summons. Carr sought release of the file, which remained with O’Gorman after he ceased acting for her in the personal injury case. The court’s decision addressed the conditions for transferring the file; it did not determine the underlying injury claim.
Carr had retained O’Gorman in January 2012 after instructing other firms. His letter of engagement described the arrangement as “no foal no fee” and said her legal costs would be recovered from the insurance company, subject to a change in circumstances. In 2014, a dispute arose over funding for a medical report and a later request for €5,000 plus VAT on account. O’Gorman applied to come off record, citing both the solicitor-client relationship breakdown and Carr’s failure to provide funds for outlays. Moriarty J. granted that application on 9 February 2015.
Carr argued that O’Gorman had wrongfully ended the retainer and was not entitled to money from her. O’Gorman maintained that the file could be transferred on payment of direct outlays and an undertaking concerning costs. A Law Society complaints committee had previously directed that the file be handed over subject to payment of outlays, stated as €1,337.50, and a satisfactory undertaking concerning costs.
Justice Faherty found that the earlier order allowing O’Gorman to come off record, together with the correspondence before that court, showed that the relationship had irretrievably broken down and that the application was not solely because Carr had failed to pay €5,000. The judge concluded that O’Gorman had not terminated the retainer without good cause, and that the Law Society’s proposed arrangement did not determine the High Court’s decision.
The judge held that the file should go to Carr’s new solicitors on their undertaking to include O’Gorman’s costs and outlays, including the €1,337.50, in any settlement or award and transmit sums received to his firm. In light of the wording of the 2012 engagement letter, the court did not require the specific outlay to be paid before transfer. The order preserves the solicitor’s lien while allowing the litigation to proceed through new representation.