||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 92 (Jan)
||Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Thorpe and Buxton LJJ
||Andrew Charman (instructed by Thurfields, Kidderminster) for the claimant.
||John Mason (instructed by Berry, Redmond & Robinson, Weston-super-Mare) for the defendant.
||17 January 2002
Contract - Champerty - Public policy - Claimant and defendant entering into joint venture - Claimant entering into agreement to help defendant conduct unrelated litigation for consideration of part of proceeds of litigation - Judge finding claimant entitled to proceeds of litigation - Whether agreement champertous - Whether agreement contrary to public policy.
The correct question for consideration in determining whether an agreement was champertous was whether or not it had been demonstrated that a party had a legitimate interest in the subject matter. In reaching that decision, a court would have regard to all aspects of the transaction taken together and looked at as a whole. In the instant case, the judge had been entitled to conclude that the claimant had a legitimate interest in the outcome of the litigation and that an agreement with the defendant to share the proceeds was not champertous or contrary to public policy.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary