"Success fee" of an advocate: on the way to the unity of judicial practice

Authors

  • Oleksandr Popov

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21564/2225-6555.2022.21.260038

Keywords:

success fee, court costs in civil proceedings, advocate in civil proceedings, the Supreme Court, the unity of judicial practice, legal opinions of the Supreme Court

Abstract

The presented work is devoted to the study of the legal nature of the "success fee" as a form of attorney’s remuneration for the provision of legal assistance, as well as to the consideration of the possibilities of applying the structure of such remuneration in the national legal field.

The review of the current legislation of Ukraine, as well as the legislation of other countries on the perception and legal regulation of the "success fee", based on the traditional division of law systems into Anglo-Saxon and Continental, was carried out. It is noted that the "success fee" by its nature is an additional remuneration to a lawyer, that is, a premium (bonus) that is paid to the latter in the event of a successful resolution of the client’s case, in addition to the fee that is payable for the provision of services provided by the lawyer under the contract for the provision of legal assistance.

Based on the fundamental function of the Supreme Court to ensure the unity of judicial practice, the dynamics of law enforcement approaches is traced at the level of its legal opinions, affecting the nature of the "success fee" and its legality. It is argued that the current practice of the Supreme Court has weakened its categorical attitude to the "success fee" and proceeds from the acceptability of this form of additional attorney’s remuneration, the payment of which depends on the outcome of the case. Also, the conclusions of the Supreme Court on the application of certain norms of procedural laws consider the possibility of resolving the issue of compensation for the costs incurred by a person to pay the “success fee” when the court decides on the distribution of court costs.

According to the results of the study, in order to avoid any differences in law enforcement approaches in the future, separate proposals were made for the proper settlement of the issue of "success fee" in national law.

References

Sakara, N.Yu. (2017). Instytut zabezpechennia vytrat na profesiinu pravnychu dopomohu cherez pryzmu prava na dostup do sudu. Adaptatsiia pravovoi systemy Ukrainy do prava Yevropeiskoho Soiuzu: teoretychni ta praktychni aspekty: materialy II vseukr. nauk.-prakt. konf. (m. Poltava, 23 lystop. 2017 r.) – Adaptation of the legal system of Ukraine to the law of the European Union: theoretical and practical aspects. Proceedings of the Scientific and Practical Conference. Poltava : Rossava, Part 1, 179–182 [In Ukrainian].

Isakova, V.M. (2012). Pravo na pravovu dopomohu yak element pryntsypu dostupnosti pravosuddia. Forum prava – Law Forum, 4, 404–410. URL: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/FP_index [іn Ukrainian].

Zabotin, V. (2017). Pravo na pravovu dopomohu yak minimalnyi standart dostupnosti tsyvilnoho sudochynstva. Pidpryiemstvo, hospodarstvo i pravo – Enterprise, Economy and Law, 4, 8-12 [іn Ukrainian].

Bondarenko-Zelinska, N.L. (2008). Pravovi dopomoha yak element dostupnosti pravosuddia. Pryvatne pravo i pidpryiemnytstvo – Private law and Entrepreneurship, issue 7, 205-210 [іn Ukrainian].

Konstytutsiia Ukrainy: ofits. tekst. (2013). Kyiv: KM [іn Ukrainian].

Pro advokaturu i advokatsku diialnist: Zakon Ukrainy vid 05.07.2012 r. № 5076-VI. (2013). Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy – Official Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 27, art. 282. [іn Ukrainian].

Pravyla advokatskoi etyky: zatv. Zvitno-vybornym z’izdom advokativ Ukrainy 2017 r. vid 09.06.2017 r. ; zi zminamy, zatv. Z’izdom advokativ Ukrainy 2019 r. vid 15.02.2019 r. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/rada/show/n0001891-17#Text [іn Ukrainian].

Rishennia Rady advokativ Kharkivskoi oblasti vid 21.07.2021 № 13/1/7 «Pro rozghliad zvernen advokativ Kharkivshchyny stosovno neobkhidnosti perehliadu rozrobky (minimalnykh) stavok advokatskoho honoraru». URL: https://advokat.org.ua/articles/1531-rekomendovanyy-rozmir-advokatskoho-honoraru.html [іn Ukrainian].

Drozdov, O. (2018). Gonorar uspihu advokata: svitovyj dosvit i perspektyvy zakonodavchogo vreguljuvannja v Ukrai’ni. JurLiga. Platforma: Liga-Zakon – Legal League. "Liga-Zakon" Platform. URL: https://jurliga.ligazakon.net/analitycs/171358_gonorar-uspkhu-advokata-svtoviy-dosvd--perspektivi-zakonodavchogo-vregulyuvannya-v-ukran [іn Ukrainian].

Zaborovskyy, V. (2020). «Success fee» as in important component of ensuring the constitutional right of a person to professional legal assistance. Konstytutsiino-pravovi akademichni studii – Constitutional and Legal Academic Studies, vol. 3, 49–58 [іn Ukrainian].

Kozlov, S. (2020). Chomu v Ukraini «ne liubliat» honorar uspikhu advokata. Yurydychna hazeta – Legal newspaper, 6, 8–11 [іn Ukrainian].

Luspenyk, D.D. (2019). Honorar uspikhu advokata: praktyka Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny. Sudovo-iurydychna hazeta – Judicial and Legal Newspaper. URL: https://sud.ua/ru/news/blog/134897-gonorar-uspikhu-advokata-praktika-yevropeyskogo-sudu-z-prav-lyudini-ad323b [іn Ukrainian].

Fliazhnikova, Ya. (2020). Pro honorar uspikhu advokata. European political and law discourse, vol. 7, issue 1, 92–99 [іn Ukrainian].

Zahalnyi kodeks pravyl dlia advokativ krain Yevropeiskoho Spivtovarystva: Pryiniato delehatsiieiu dvanadtsiaty krain-uchasnyts na plenarnomu zasidanni u Strasburzi v zhovtni 1988 r. (1988). URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/994_343 [іn Ukrainian].

Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. (1990). URL: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/41/section/58.

Model Rules of Professional Conduct. The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct were adopted by the ABA House of Delegates in 1983. (1983). URL: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/resources.

Pro sudoustrii i status suddiv: Zakon Ukrainy vid 02.06.2016 r. № 1402-VIII. (2016). Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy – Official Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 31, art. 545 [іn Ukrainian].

Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 12.06.2018 u spravi № 462/9002/14-ts. (2018). URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/76022516 [іn Ukrainian].

Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 25.01.2018 u spravi № 401/1466/15-ts. (2018). URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/71828855 [іn Ukrainian].

Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 22.05.2018 u spravi № 826/8107/16. (2018). URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/74203997 [іn Ukrainian].

Vitjuk, R. (2018). Gonorar za uspih. Bonus dlja advokata chy korupcijna skladova? Zakon i Biznes – Law and Business, 31. URL: https://zib.com.ua/ua/print/133986-bonus_dlya_advokata_stimul_chi_korupciyna_skladova.html [іn Ukrainian].

Mamchenko, N. (2018). Gonorar uspeha dlja advokata: v KGS Verhovnogo Suda prokommentyrovaly svoju pozycyju. Sudebno-jurydycheskaja gazeta – Judicial and Legal Newspaper, 34-35, 8, 18 [іn Russian].

Okrema dumka suddi Krata V.I. vid 12 chervnia 2018 roku u spravi № 462/9002/14-ts. (2018). URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/74963389 [іn Ukrainian].

Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 03.07.2019 u spravi № 757/20995/15-ts. (2019). URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/83203381 [іn Ukrainian].

Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 10.07.2019 u spravi № 912/2391/16. (2019). URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/83118178 [іn Ukrainian].

Pro vykonannia rishen ta zastosuvannia praktyky Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny: Zakon Ukrainy vid 23.02.2006 r. № 3477-IV. (2006).Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy – Official Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 30, art. 260. [іn Ukrainian].

Iatridis v. Greece (Artcle 41) 19 of October 2000. (2020). URL: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-59087.

Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 12.05.2020 u spravi № 904/4507/18. (2020). URL: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/91572017 [іn Ukrainian].

Shapoval D., Kostrikova Ye. (2021). Honorar uspikhu po-ukrainsky. Chy vartuie hra svichok u nashykh realiiakh. Yurydychna hazeta – Legal newspaper, 23 (753). URL: https://yur-gazeta.com/dumka-eksperta/gonorar-uspihu-poukrayinski-chi-vartue-gra-svichok-u-nashih-realiyah.html [іn Ukrainian].

Gusarov K., Terekhov V. (2019). Finality of Judgments in Civil Cases and Related Considerations: The Experience of Ukraine and Lithuania. Access to justice in eastern Europe, 4(5), 6–30.

Published

2022-07-06

How to Cite

Popov, O. (2022). "Success fee" of an advocate: on the way to the unity of judicial practice. Theory and Practice of Jurisprudence, 1(21), 18–35. https://doi.org/10.21564/2225-6555.2022.21.260038

Issue

Section

Civil law and civil procedure