The court considered a motion for approval of a contingency fee agreement (CFA) in a medical malpractice action that settled for $14 million.
The litigation guardian challenged the proposed fee of approximately $4.1 million.
The court found the CFA was neither fair when entered into nor reasonable at present due to non-compliance with regulatory requirements and the disproportionate fee relative to the client's damages.
The proposed fee was disallowed, and a reduced fee of $3,250,000, plus HST and disbursements, was ordered, applying a staggered percentage approach.
