Professional Fees and Passive Solidarity: Commentary on Ordinance No. 20922 of 2024

The recent Ordinance No. 20922 of July 26, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, has raised important questions regarding the professional fees of lawyers and their obligations in relation to services rendered to multiple parties. This ruling clarifies the presumption of passive solidarity in the context of legal services and its significance for professionals in the field.

The Context of the Ruling

In the case examined, the Court established that passive solidarity applies to fees owed for legal services rendered to multiple subjects, even if the mandates are formally distinct. This implies that, if a lawyer assists multiple clients with identical positions, the service can be considered unitary, thus making all clients responsible for the payment of the fee.

Professional fees - Plural obligation in relation to the lawyer's service - Passive solidarity - Existence - Case. Regarding professional fees of lawyers, the presumption of passive solidarity for the payment of fees owed to the professional assisting multiple parties, which, although with formally autonomous mandates from one another, have identical positions that qualify the legal service rendered as substantially unitary, also applies to extrajudicial services (in this case, assistance in the drafting of a contract).

Practical Implications for Lawyers

This ruling has several implications for lawyers and their clients. In particular, it highlights the importance of considering the nature of the legal service provided. Among the main implications, we can list:

  • The need to clarify mandates and responsibilities among the parties involved.
  • The possibility for the lawyer to request payment of the fee from any of the clients, without having to prove the specific participation of each in the service.
  • The relevance of the unitary service even in extrajudicial activities, such as contract drafting.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 20922 of 2024 represents an important step forward in defining the responsibility of clients towards lawyers. The passive solidarity, as established by the Court, must be considered not only in the context of judicial disputes but also in extrajudicial matters, thus influencing professional dynamics and relationships between lawyers and clients. It is therefore essential for lawyers to adopt proactive measures to manage mandates and ensure a clear understanding of responsibilities by their clients.

Bianucci Law Firm