Propriety of Claiming Solicitors Fees_2018 – Olalere

Share This Post

Share on facebook
Share on linkedin
Share on twitter
Share on email
Share on whatsapp
Share on print

Propriety Of Claiming Solicitors Fees_2018

It is trite law that where there is a legal wrong there must be a remedy as aptly captured in the latin maxim ubi jus, ibi remedium.

Introduction

It is trite law that where there is a legal wrong there must be a remedy as aptly captured in the latin maxim ubi jus, ibi remedium. It is also trite that costs follow events and a successful party is entitled to cost which he should not be deprived of except for a good or special

reason. 2   If the Claimant’s case seeking payment of outstanding sums in a civil matter succeeds, it is the writer’s humble view that the claim for expenses and costs (including

legal or solicitor’s fees) ought to be awarded as prayed as there would not have been a need to incur legal or solicitor’s fees whatsoever had the defendant (losing side) paid the Claimant (winning side) before the latter approached the court.

The above was the line of submissions in the final written address in respect of a recent matter in which the Claimant later won on all grounds except on the award of the solicitor’s fees in respect of which the above argument was put forth by the present writer. The court’s reasoning for not awarding the solicitor’s fees was that though properly pleaded as part of special damages, with the fees agreement with the Claimant duly tendered and received in evidence, it was not strictly proved as the Claimant only tendered the fees agreement between the Claimant and solicitor in evidence. The Claimant was adjudged not to have shown evidence that the expense was incurred. This write-up thus attempts to interrogate our courts’ general reluctance to award appropriate costs in deserving events; and particularly the court’s decision regarding whether fees agreement between the Claimant and solicitor is not sufficient proof that the Claimant had incurred expenses. Conversely, can expenses incurred but not yet paid be considered as not incurred solely on the basis that same is to be paid later? Or does the fact that an expense incurred has not been paid mean that the expense has not been incurred?

For the full article, please click the link.

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Get updates and learn from the best

More To Explore

The Applicability of the Revised Limits of Liability Under the Montreal Convention to Civil Aviation Claims in Nigeria – Abdulkabir Badmos

This piece seeks to discuss the applicability of the revision of the limits of liability under the Montreal Convention 1999[2] to civil aviation claims in Nigeria, the consequences of the revision of the limits of liability on domestic laws of member states and their constitutional guarantees, if any. It contrasts the Nigerian position with some other Montreal Convention member jurisdictions to see areas of convergence or divergence. The scope of the comment shall be limited to deaths even though the revision of the limits of liability affects other claims under the convention occurring in international and non-international carriage by air in view of their peculiarities. The article ends with a call on the relevant public officers in Nigeria to take urgent steps to bring Nigeria’s aviation industry and applicable laws in tune with global standards.