C. Genova

A law firm sought assessment of its legal fees under a contingency fee retainer agreement with former clients.

The clients terminated the retainer and retained new counsel.

The law firm claimed fees totaling approximately $158,920.38 based on hourly rates, arguing the retainer agreement provided for such compensation upon termination.

The court conducted a quantum meruit analysis and found the accounts unreasonable due to vague time entries, disputed meetings that did not occur, apparent double billing, and work that did not demonstrate value to the clients.

The court reduced the fees substantially, assessing Mr. Hopkins' account at $57,424.82 (including HST) and Mrs. Hopkins' account at $27,687.35 (including HST).

The lawyers for the plaintiffs brought a motion seeking an order to be removed as lawyers of record and for a charging order for their unpaid accounts.

The motion for removal was unopposed and granted, as the court found a breakdown in the lawyer-client relationship.

However, the motion for a charging order was dismissed with prejudice.

The court found that the charging order was not properly referenced in the notice of motion, violating procedural fairness.

Furthermore, the lawyers failed to satisfy the three-part Weenen test for a charging order, specifically lacking evidence of property preserved or recovered and risk of non-payment.

The court criticized counsel's conduct, concluding they attempted to "pull a fast one" to protect their accounts, and emphasized lawyers' continuing fiduciary obligations despite conflicts of interest.