Mide-Wilson v. Hungerford Tomyn Lawrenson and Nichols, (2013) 348 B.C.A.C. 228 (CA)

• Judge: Newbury, Neilson and Willcock, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: December 31, 2013
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (2013), 348 B.C.A.C. 228 (CA);2013 BCCA 559

Mide-Wilson v. Hungerford Tomyn (2013), 348 B.C.A.C. 228 (CA);

    595 W.A.C. 228

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] B.C.A.C. TBEd. JA.036

Kirsten Mide-Wilson, also known as Kirsten Mide Wilson, also known as Kirsten Wilson, also known as Kirsten Ranghild Mide-Wilson, also known as Kirsten Ranghild Mide Wilson, also known as Kirsten Ranghild Wilson (respondent/client/appellant) v. Hungerford Tomyn Lawrenson and Nichols (appellants/solicitors/respondents)

(CA040701; 2013 BCCA 559)

Indexed As: Mide-Wilson v. Hungerford Tomyn Lawrenson and Nichols

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Newbury, Neilson and Willcock, JJ.A.

December 31, 2013.

Summary:

Mide-Wilson's grandfather placed the majority of his assets ($100 million) in a trust, the trustees and beneficiaries of which were close friends of the grandfather. Mide-Wilson suspected undue influence had been exerted on her grandfather. Mide-Wilson retained a law firm to pursue litigation. She agreed to a contingent fee agreement that would pay the law firm 20% of any settlement achieved within the first year of the litigation. After eight months of preparatory work, before discoveries, the matter was settled, with the trust funds being transferred to Mide-Wilson in exchange for her paying $8 million to the trustees. The law firm billed Mide-Wilson approximately $16 million. Mide-Wilson applied under s. 68 of the Legal Profession Act to cancel the contingent fee agreement. The law firm applied under ss. 70 and 71 for a review.

A Registrar of the British Columbia Supreme Court, in a judgment reported [2011] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1440, determined that the contingent fee agreement was neither unreasonable nor unfair, but reduced the fee from $16 million, which was excessive, to a fairer amount ($9 million). Mide-Wilson appealed.

The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a judgment reported [2013] B.C.T.C. Uned. 374, allowed the appeal and further reduced the contingent fee to $5 million. Although the contingent fee agreement was fair and reasonable, the $9 million fee was excessive and threatened the integrity of the legal profession. The law firm appealed the fee reduction. Mide-Wilson cross-appealed the finding that the contingent fee agreement was fair and reasonable.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed both the appeal and cross-appeal. The starting point of whether the fee charged under a contingent fee agreement was "fair" was the agreement itself. However, such agreements were always regulated and subject to court supervision to ensure the integrity of the legal profession was maintained. The court agreed that the $9 million fee was excessive. There was no basis to interfere with the determination of $5 million as a fair fee or with the finding that the agreement was reasonable when entered into.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 3130

Compensation - Agreements - Contingent fees - Review and approval - See paragraphs 61 to 104.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 3131

Compensation - Agreements - Contingent fees - Reasonable percentage fee - See paragraphs 61 to 104.

Cases Noticed:

Anderson v. Elliott (1998), 60 B.C.L.R.(3d) 131 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 21].

Commonwealth Investors Syndicate Ltd. v. Laxton et al. (1990), 50 B.C.L.R.(2d) 186 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Randall and Co. v. Hope (1996), 13 E.T.R.(2d) 257 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 23].

Long, Miller et al. v. Sawchuk, [2002] B.C.T.C. 542; 2002 BCSC 542, refd to. [para. 29].

Davis & Co. v. Jiwan (2008), 262 B.C.A.C. 283; 441 W.A.C. 283; 2008 BCCA 494, refd to. [para. 40].

Nathanson, Schachter & Thompson v. Inmet Mining Corp. (2009), 276 B.C.A.C. 62; 468 W.A.C. 62; 2009 BCCA 385, refd to. [para. 40].

Abel v. Burke (2000), 138 B.C.A.C. 105; 226 W.A.C. 105; 2000 BCCA 284, refd to. [para. 42].

Doig v. Davidson Muir (1998), 106 B.C.A.C. 80; 172 W.A.C. 80; 48 B.C.L.R.(3d) 53 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 52].

Coad v. Rizk (1999), 13 B.C.T.C. 165; 68 B.C.L.R.(3d) 340 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 52].

Commonwealth Investors Syndicate Ltd. v. Laxton et al. (1994), 48 B.C.A.C. 206; 78 W.A.C. 206; 94 B.C.L.R.(2d) 177 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 53].

Hunter et al. v. Parpatt, [2011] B.C.T.C. Uned. 800; 2011 BCSC 800, refd to. [para. 55].

Schober v. Walker (2008), 253 B.C.A.C. 77; 425 W.A.C. 77; 2008 BCCA 19, refd to. [para. 63].

Housen v. Nikolaisen et al. (2002), 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 33, refd to. [para. 63].

Slingsby v. Attorney General, [1918] P. 236, refd to. [para. 64].

Friends of the Oldman River Society v. Canada (Minister of Transport and Minister of Fisheries and Oceans), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 3; 132 N.R. 321, refd to. [para. 65].

Charles Osenton & Co. v. Johnston, [1942] A.C. 130 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 65].

Wenngatz v. 371431 Alberta Ltd. et al. (2013), 337 B.C.A.C. 291; 576 W.A.C. 291; 2013 BCCA 225, refd to. [para. 65].

Logan v. Dermatech (2013), 338 B.C.A.C. 239; 577 W.A.C. 239; 2013 BCCA 249, refd to. [para. 65].

Public Guardian and Trustee (B.C.) v. Ralston et al. (2008), 259 B.C.A.C. 273; 436 W.A.C. 273; 2008 BCCA 372, refd to. [para. 65].

Timberwolf Log Trading Ltd. v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests and Lands) et al. (2013), 335 B.C.A.C. 1; 573 W.A.C. 1; 2013 BCCA 24, refd to. [para. 65].

Stone v. Ellerman et al. (2009), 273 B.C.A.C. 126; 461 W.A.C. 126; 2009 BCCA 294, refd to. [para. 65].

Usipuik v. Jensen (No. 2) (1986), 7 B.C.L.R.(2d) 58 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 66].

Macfarlane v. MacLaughlin (1974), 50 D.L.R.(3d) 140 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 66].

Lee v. Richmond Hospital Society (2005), 209 B.C.A.C. 161; 345 W.A.C. 161; 2005 BCCA 107, refd to. [para. 70].

Richardson v. Low (1996), 23 B.C.L.R.(3d) 268 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 70].

Bizovie v. Cornish et al., [2003] B.C.T.C. 1615; 2003 BCSC 1615, refd to. [para. 70].

Lauk & Associates v. Farshchian, [2002] B.C.T.C. 768; 2002 BCSC 768 (Reg.), refd to. [para. 70].

Cannon et al. v. Legal Services Society (B.C.), [2006] B.C.T.C. 429; 2006 BCSC 429 (Reg.), refd to. [para. 70].

Orion Trucking Centre Ltd. (Bankrupt), Re (2006), 232 B.C.A.C. 49; 385 W.A.C. 49; 2006 BCCA 418, refd to. [para. 73].

Boe v. Waters (1998), 23 C.P.C.(4th) 395 (S.C. Reg.), refd to. [para. 74].

Prodor v. Newell, [1992] B.C.J. No. 2966 (S.C. Master), refd to. [para. 74].

McDougall v. Campbell, [1877] O.J. No. 100 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 80].

British Columbia Land and Investment Agency Ltd. v. Wilson (1903), 9 B.C.R. 412 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 81].

Tyrrell v. Bank of London (1862), 10 H.L. Cas. 26; 11 E.R. 934, refd to. [para. 82].

Pittman v. Prudential Deposit Bank Ltd. (1896), 13 T.L.R. 110 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 82].

Solicitor, Re, [1931] 1 D.L.R. 315 (Ont. S.C.), refd to. [para. 85].

Tweten v. Nichols (1985), 61 B.C.L.R. 225 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 85].

Oakes v. Smith (1870), 17 Gr. 660 (Ont. Ch.), refd to. [para. 85].

McIntyre Estate v. Ontario (Attorney General) (2002), 164 O.A.C. 37; 61 O.R.(3d) 257 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 89].

O'Brien v. Tyrone Enterprises Ltd. et al. (2012), 275 Man.R.(2d) 106; 538 W.A.C. 106; 2012 MBCA 3, refd to. [para. 89].

McQuarrie, Hunter v. Foote (1982), 41 B.C.L.R. 123 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 92].

Endean v. Canadian Red Cross Society et al., [2000] B.C.T.C. 436; 2000 BCSC 971, refd to. [para. 93].

Statutes Noticed:

Legal Profession Act, S.B.C. 1998, c. 9, sect. 65, sect. 66, sect. 67, sect. 68(1), sect. 68(2), sect. 68(5), sect. 68(6), sect. 68(7), sect. 68(8), sect. 70(1), sect. 70(13), sect. 70(14), sect. 72 [para. 3].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England (19th Ed. 1783), p. 28 [para. 80].

Minish, Loraine, The Contingent Fee A Re-Examinae (1979), 10 Man. L.J. 65, p. 68 [para. 83].

Orkin, Mark M., Legal Ethics (1957), p. 145 [para. 81].

Pleasence, Pascoe, and Balmer, Nigel J., Caught in the Middle: Justiciable Problems and the Use of Lawyers, Middle Income Access to Justice (2012), p. 5-01 [para. 89].

Counsel:

H. Wiebach and J.P. Sullivan, for the appellants/solicitors;

G.K. Macintosh, Q.C., D.E. Gruber and T.A. Dickson, for the respondent/client.

This appeal was heard on November 4-6, 2013, at Vancouver, B.C., before Newbury, Neilson and Willcock, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal.

On December 31, 2013, Newbury, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.