18 St John Street Costs Expert James Miller provides his insight in a current LexisNexis blog on the issue of Damages Based Agreements (DBAs) in high-value probate cases.
In a current LexisNexis blog, James Miller analyses the case of Reeves v Frain (aka Simon Kevin Reeves aka Bill Reeves) and another [2025] and explores the issue of Damages Based Agreements (DBAs) in high-value probate cases.
The Senior Courts Costs Office held that Damages Based Agreements (DBAs) in a high-value probate case were unenforceable due to non-compliance with the DBA Regulations 2013. The court rejected cost claims under both the DBAs and purported new retainers, emphasising strict adherence to statutory requirements.
This ruling underscores the critical importance of carefully drafting funding arrangements and retainers in line with regulations. It serves as a stark reminder to practitioners of the risks associated with non-compliant DBAs, potentially resulting in inability to recover costs. The case also reaffirms the court’s commitment to public policy, administration of justice, and consumer protection in assessing such agreements.
James’ commentary and thoughts on the practical implications can be found on the LexisNexis subscription site.
LexisNexis is a leading global provider of legal, regulatory and business information and analytics.
For further information on James Miller and the Personal Injury, Clinical Negligence & Costs Department please contact Chambers Director James Parks or Senior Clerk Katie Brown.