As stated above, special costs amount to roughly 80 to 90 percent of what “… a reasonable client would pay a reasonably competent solicitor for performing the work described in the bill….” There is conflicting case law on whether an assessment of what ‘a reasonable client would pay’ should be based on fees paid pursuant to a contingency agreement or actual time-spent. In Chapman v. Unruh, [1996] B.C.J. No. 1481 (Q.L.) (B.C.S.C.) the court accepted that the fees paid by the plaintiff under a contingency fee agreement were the appropriate starting point for a determination of whether an award of ordinary costs would produce an unjust result. The court held that the calculation of increased costs should be based on special costs assessed to be 80 to 90 percent of the amount of the contingency fee, rather than the amount of a hypothetical bill prepared for the purposes of the increased costs application. However, in that case the hypothetical bill was unrealistically high and in fact much greater than the fees paid under the contingency agreement.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.