The High Court has refused a solicitor’s application for summary judgment over legal fees claimed from two defendants, remitting the dispute to a plenary hearing.
In a judgment delivered electronically on 31 October 2024, Mr Justice Barr said oral evidence was needed to resolve what the parties had agreed when they referred the fees to expert determination, and whether the second defendant had ever retained the solicitor. The court did not decide the defendants’ ultimate liability for the fees.
The plaintiff sought €187,014, plus €22,401 in interest and costs. That figure followed an expert determination assessing fees for work by the solicitor and counsel in three cases at €197,014, less €10,000 already paid on account. The original summary summons, issued in July 2017, claimed €163,058 and had not been amended. The judge said the amount could not be increased through the summary judgment motion; an application to amend the summons would be required.
The plaintiff argued that the defendants had agreed to expert determination of the fee amount and were bound by the resulting assessment. The defendants disputed liability. The first defendant maintained that counsel had represented there would be a substantial reduction in fees because an action against Ulster Bank was settling on discounted terms. She said she assumed her legal team’s fees would be reduced by at least 50%. The second defendant said he was not a client and had signed fee documents only as a witness to his mother’s signature.
The judge found no clear evidence that referring the amount of fees to an expert also settled who was liable to pay them. The expert had assessed the reasonableness of the work’s value, and the judgment noted that the expert did not address the contention that the first defendant had not instructed the solicitor in the Ulster Bank case. The court also found no written evidence that the second defendant had retained the solicitor. Whether he was a client, and the precise terms of the expert referral, would require oral evidence.
The judgment noted that no section 68 letter or bill of costs was exhibited, and that the defendants had repeatedly sought taxation of the fees. It refused the relief sought in the motion and remitted the case to plenary hearing. Once the action is reconstituted, the plaintiff may deliver a statement of claim; the defendants are to have six weeks after receiving it to deliver their defences. The costs of the summary judgment application were reserved to trial.
The judgment proposed final orders and invited brief written submissions on their terms, costs and other arising matters within two weeks. It listed the case for mention on 26 November 2024 to make final orders.