Solicitors (Northern Ireland) Order 1976

[F1 Effect on contentious business agreement of supervening incapacity of recognised body to act for client N.I.

F1 1989 NI 14

30.— (1) If, after some business has been done under a contentious business agreement made between a recognised body and a client but before the body has wholly performed it, the body ceases to be capable of wholly performing it by reason of one of the following events, namely— N.I.

(a) the body ceases (for any reason) to be a recognised body;

(b) a winding-up order is made with respect to the body or a resolution for voluntary winding-up is passed with respect to the body (other than a resolution passed solely for the purposes of its reconstruction or of its amalgamation with another body corporate); or

(c) the client terminates the retainer or employment of the body in favour of another recognised body or a solicitor (as, notwithstanding the agreement, he shall be entitled to do),

any party to, or the representative of any party to, the agreement may apply to the court, and the court shall have the same jurisdiction as to enforcing the agreement so far as it has been performed, or setting it aside, as the court would have had if the recognised body were still capable of wholly performing it.

(2) The court, notwithstanding that it is of the opinion that the agreement is in all respects fair and reasonable, may order the amount due in respect of business under the agreement to be ascertained by taxation, and in that case—

(a) the taxing officer, in ascertaining that amount, shall have regard so far as may be to the terms of the agreement; and

(b) payment of the amount found by him to be due may be enforced in the same manner as if the agreement had been wholly performed.

(3) If in such a case as is mentioned in subparagraph (1)(c) an order is made for the taxation of the amount due to the recognised body in respect of the business done under the agreement, the court shall direct the taxing officer to have regard to the circumstances under which the termination of the body's retainer or employment has taken place, and the taxing officer, unless he is of the opinion that there has been no default, negligence, improper delay or other conduct on the part of any officer or employee of the body affording the client reasonable ground for terminating its retainer or employment, shall not allow to the body the full amount of the remuneration agreed to be paid to it.

(4) In this paragraph “the court” has the meaning assigned by Article 66(6) and in this paragraph and paragraph 31 “the taxing officer” has the meaning assigned by Article 66(7).]