Forde v Birmingham City Council [2008] EWHC 90105

Posted on Wednesday, April 30th, 2008

This was a housing repair matter where the Claimant had entered into 2 CFAs, the 1st on 16/03/05 and the 2nd on 05/04/06.

The Defendant submitted that neither CFA was enforceable in light of undue influence on the Claimant, the absence of consideration for the 2nd CFA and retrospectivity.

It was found that the 1st CFA was terminated and replaced by the 2nd CFA and that the 2nd CFA was enforceable and retrospective (it covered work undertaken from the date of the 1st CFA). It was reasonable for the Claimant to enter into the 2nd CFA and there was found to be no undue influence on the Claimant.

Therefore, the Claimant could recover (subject to assessment) the base costs claimed in the 2nd CFA but without a success fee.

Bookmark and Share


Receive our news and updates
Enter your email address below to subscribe
Contact us
Tel: 01228 819131 Fax: 01228 501810 Dx: 63314 Penrith Email:

We would happily recommend the services of Paramount to all litigation departments. Their team is highly proficient and they have successfully negotiated some excellent costs settlements at competitive prices. Professional yet always “user-friendly” –an absolute pleasure to do business with.

© 2015 Paramount Legal Costs Limited