Bott & Co Solicitors Ltd v Ryanair DAC 2022 UKSC 8 16 March 2022

https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/...

This case invoked the subject of professional legal services. In particular, it invoked the principle of a ‘solicitor’s equitable right of lien’ and how it applied in obtaining a success fee during alternative dispute resolution.

The material facts were that Botts Solicitors acted for people who had been mistreated whilst on the airlines – lost/late baggage, excessively delayed flights etc.

Botts had a ‘no win, no fee’ commission in place with their clients ie if Botts obtained their client £1000, and there was a 20% commission in place, the client owed Botts £200, and the client then kept the remaining £800.

Ryan Air used to send the cheques for damages to Botts, so Botts would cash the cheque from Ryan Air, deduct their success fee, and then send the rest of the money to their client.

However, Ryan Air, changed their system. Ryan Air refused to send Botts the cheque first. Ryan Air instead insisted upon sending it to Bott’s client instead.

This made it an absolute nightmare for Botts to try and obtain their success fee from their client.

Botts informed that Ryan Air that they either had to send them the whole cheque, or send 1 cheque to them with their success fee, and another cheque to the client with the remaining damages. Ryan Air refused to do this however and so Botts took them to Court over it.

Botts argued that Ryan Air had to do this based upon the solicitor’s equitable right of lien principle.

Ryan Air however argued the solicitor’s equitable right of lien principle did not apply because formal Court litigation had not started, and it was only then that this principle kicked in – these cheques were sent out under alternative dispute resolution which Ryan Air argued was not litigation where the equitable right of lien applied.

The Court upheld the arguments of Botts and argued that the principle of a solicitor’s equitable right of lien could be extended in these circumstances to alternative dispute resolution. If Ryanair in future insist upon sending the damages cheque to the client and not the solicitor, then they must deduct the success fee from this and send another cheque to the solicitor with this.

‘in accordance with the standard principles applicable to the equitable lien, Ryanair was here bound by the equitable lien because it had notice of it. Once it had notice of the lien, it was taking the risk of double liability if it chose to pay the client direct’, Lord Burrows at 101