Description
Here the pursuer sought an additional fee in terms of rule 42.14(a), (b) and (e) of the Rules of the Court of Session 1994. As to head (a), "the complexity of the cause and the number, difficulty or novelty of the questions raised", the issue of complexity was centred on the medical consequences of the accident. As to head (b), "the skill, time and labour, and specialised knowledge required, of the solicitor, or the exceptional urgency of the steps taken by him," there was no claim on the ground of exceptional urgency. However, the skill, time, labour and specialised knowledge required were beyond the norm. As to head (e), "the importance of the cause or the subject-matter to the client," he was a young man from whom much had been taken and lived in an unsuitable local authority house which had been little adapted for his needs. He would need finance to adapt a house. The damages would also facilitate his paying for a pain management programme at an establishment in Liverpool which dealt with people with chronic pain. The defenders opposed the motion:- "This is an action in which liability was admitted from an early stage. The only issues arising were essentially medical, or flowed from the medical position. Those issues were dealt with in the normal way by the instruction of the appropriate expert. There are not circumstances arising in the present case warranting the award of an additional fee under heads (a), (b) or (e) of Rule 42.14."
