The applicants sought a declaration that a contingency fee agreement (CFA) executed in October 2019 applied only to the trial award and not to the increased award on appeal or to a subsequent settlement.
The respondent law firm claimed entitlement to a 30% contingency on both the appeal award and settlement.
The court found that the CFA was a trial retainer only, that no valid contingency fee agreement existed for the appeal (as any alleged oral agreement failed to comply with the Solicitors Act requirement that contingency fee agreements be in writing), and that the CFA did not apply to the settlement.
The court awarded the lawyers fees on a quantum meruit basis for their appeal work.
