For this week’s blog, I have turned the spotlight on the firm’s dispute resolution team or what old lawyers like me call litigation. I have spoken to one of the younger members of our team Solicitor, Michael Sproates. Michael came to Jacksons first as a temporary paralegal following completion of his degree and impressed us so much we gave him a training contract. In September 2015 he qualified into our litigation team where he is proving to be a valuable team member and a tenacious litigator. This is what Michael has to say.
1. Why did you choose to do dispute resolution work when you qualified?
Before I began my training contract I didn’t particularly have one specific department in mind. I always knew I would lean towards the commercial side, however, once I started my seat in litigation I knew I would be well suited to it. The department is fast paced and you often have to deal with issues under pressure. I could also see there was an opportunity to develop within the firm due to the level of caseload in the department and I like the fact that the work is varied. I also get on well with the team which is certainly important.
2. What are the aspects of your job you find most enjoyable?
My favourite aspect of the job is probably trying to out think opponents or pre-empting their next move. I enjoy the tactical side of things, especially when it comes to negotiating settlements. Once both parties have put forward their respective arguments it is quite often the case that settlement should be considered, whether that involves putting Part 36 offers forward or commencing without prejudice discussions. Having good negotiation skills and tactical awareness can often be a useful tool.
3. I know you have specialism in building disputes – What sort of disputes come up?
The main sorts of building disputes I deal with usually involve homeowners who have entered into a dispute with a contractor. This is often due to the contractor either abandoning site or carrying out works which are defective. I also tend to act on behalf of sub-contractors who have not been paid despite serving payment applications, so I have therefore dealt with disputes from both sides. Building disputes can often be fairly complex due to the scale of the works conducted, the sums involved and the technical details. Before I started I certainly couldn’t have told you the difference between a tie beam and a king post truss!
4. Do you see any patterns in these disputes where disputes could be avoided if preventative action is taken?
As with any dispute, the most common issues we come across relate back to the contractual documentation, or lack of it. It is surprising how often we deal with disputes where the parties do not have any written terms in place, despite the fact that they have provided services in return for large sums. Whilst a contract may still be formed orally, without any written documentation it is extremely difficult to establish the terms which may or may not have been incorporated into the contract. I have also seen cases whereby parties have sufficient standard terms and conditions, but have either not sent them across or have not made the other party aware that they even exist. In these circumstances it often boils down to one party’s word against the other. My advice would always be to make sure you have the necessary documentation in place at the outset as this will save money and time in the long run.
5. Litigation is known to be very expensive do we use alternative methods to settle cases before court?
As I have touched on previously, we often take into consideration alternative methods before going to court. Unfortunately, litigation is expensive. Court fees seem to be increasing on a regular basis and if a claim does proceed all the way to a final hearing, there is often a lot of legal work required in the stages leading up to it. This may be in the form of drafting pleadings, witness statements or instructing experts. In light of this, we always look at alternative methods of dispute resolution, such as mediation, arbitration or adjudication. These methods are usually far more cost effective and also involve shorter processes, requiring less work and saving time. To give an example, Adjudicator’s decisions are usually given within 28 days of the matter being referred.
6. What is the case you have dealt with to date that you are most proud of?
My proudest moment took place during a recent adjudication. Coincidentally, the parties did not have a written contract in place, nor were there any emails between them. Neither party was aware of, or had followed, recognised payment provisions and both parties could have been deemed to have repudiated the contract. Unfortunately, there wasn’t a great deal of evidence to work with, however, I advised the client to immediately serve a payment application and we ended up referring the matter to adjudication. In the end, the client was awarded the full value of the claim, plus costs and interest. Given the lack of documentation, it was a great feeling being able to turn this unfavourable situation into a positive result.
7. How do we help a client assess whether taking action is worth the risk of cost?
At the early stages it is often a good idea to review the sum in dispute. If the amount in dispute is low, then more often than not the cost of taking legal action will outweigh the value of the claim and so it would not be cost effective to take legal action. It can, however, sometimes be advisable for the client to pursue the claim without legal assistance or to explore other avenues such as pro-bono, university law offices or Citizens Advice. The cost of sending an initial letter of claim is relatively low and it can often be advisable for us to at least open correspondence with an opponent to see if the matter can be resolved at low cost. However, each case will be different and I tend to assess each client’s position based on the facts and evidence available at the time. If the prospects of success are reasonable, we would then take a full a full review of the risks, likely cost and available options when deciding which is the best course of action for each particular client. This review will also take into consideration any points of dispute or counterclaims raised by an opponent.
8. What is the most satisfying aspect of your job?
The most satisfying aspect of the job is getting a successful result for a client. It’s a great feeling if you can achieve every penny for the client, however, in most cases this is impossible and therefore a favourable settlement can often be a positive result. I suppose the most rewarding moments are when clients express how grateful they are. One recent client in particular came to me without any hope of a successful recovery and we managed to get the full amount, plus all of his legal costs. He advised me that the result meant that he was able to continue trading and would be sure to recommend the firm to others.
9. Apart from your love of litigation what do you enjoy about working for Jacksons?
I think one of the best things about Jacksons is the friendly atmosphere. To be successful in your job you have to enjoy it and if you don’t get along with your co-workers then it makes it more difficult to be productive. Seeing some of my colleagues progress is also positive as it’s encouraging to see that your career can develop within the firm. Aside from that, I like the fact that we have good relationships with our clients and they continue to instruct the firm for all of their legal requirements, not just in relation to disputes. I believe this loyalty highlights the level of customer service we provide.
I have really enjoyed talking to Michael about his work and hope you enjoy his thoughts too. Next week I am on holiday so this blog will be written by my partner Simon Catterall.
