A client who believes the fee charged bears no relation to the work performed is not without remedy, and the signature on a fee agreement does not close the door.
The starting point is that the agreement is honoured. A fee does not become excessive merely because it looks high in hindsight, nor because the matter concluded sooner than expected. The question is whether there is a reasonable relation between the fee charged and the work involved, the complexity of the matter, the risk the lawyer assumed and the result achieved.
In the absence of a written agreement, and where an oral one is not proved, payment is determined by reference to a reasonable fee, meaning an assessment of the economic value of the work actually done. The court weighs the scope of the work, the complexity of the matter, the seniority of the lawyer and the standing of the firm. The absence of a written agreement generally operates against the lawyer, who bears the burden of proof.
The relationship rests on confidence, and a client may end the retainer during the matter. The agreement itself may also be set aside under the ordinary law of contract, for misrepresentation, mistake, undue influence or duress at the time of signature. Even after cancellation the client may remain liable for a reasonable fee for work already performed.
Where a fee has been paid for work that was never done, where the representation ended before the task was completed, or where the sum charged departs markedly from the reasonable, repayment may be claimed. The legal basis may be breach of the fee agreement, unjust enrichment, or a finding that the fee was not a reasonable fee for the work.
HAND MADE BY
