The
recent case of Lewis v
Ward Hadaway [2015]
EWHC 3503, raises serious concerns for litigators acting for
claimant’s with limited funds and makes clear the potential danger
of not paying the correct court fee.
In
this case, the solicitor acting on the behalf of multiple Claimants
issued 31 professional negligence claims against a Defendant firm who
had previous carried out multiple conveyancing transactions for the
Claimants. The majority of these claim forms were submitted just
before the limitation deadline. However, the statements of value on
these claim forms were significantly lower than the claim value
initially set out on the letters of claim. This resulted in the
claimants paying a much lower court fee upon issue. Prior to service
of the claim, the claim forms were then amended to reflect the actual
value of the claims and the balance of the higher court fee was paid.
The
Defendant applied to strike out the claim on the basis of this being
an abuse of process. The court found that while understating the
value of the claim did amount to an abuse of process because it
deprived the court the necessary fees and generated further costs and
administrative work for the court, it would have been
disproportionate to have struck out the claim. This was because there
was a lack of prejudice towards the defendant and the fact that the
period of abuse was limited. However, the court did award summary
judgment against 11 of the claimants on the basis of the limitation
periods of these claims having expired.
In
light of the recent increases to court fees in 2015 and the
likelihood of further increases in the near future, this case serves
as a reminder to any solicitors to make certain that the correct
court fee is paid upon the issue of a claim. However, the case does
raise questions for solicitors acting for impecunious clients who are
unable to pay increasing court fees. Notably in the judgment it was
stated that a claimant should seek the agreement of both the
defendant and the court to ensure ‘complete transparency’.
However in practice this may not always be possible.
In
this case, the solicitor acting on the behalf of multiple Claimants
issued 31 professional negligence claims against a Defendant firm who
had previous carried out multiple conveyancing transactions for the
Claimants. The majority of these claim forms were submitted just
before the limitation deadline. However, the statements of value on
these claim forms were significantly lower than the claim value
initially set out on the letters of claim. This resulted in the
claimants paying a much lower court fee upon issue. Prior to service
of the claim, the claim forms were then amended to reflect the actual
value of the claims and the balance of the higher court fee was paid.