<center><span class="news-text_italic-underline">Judgment Date: 5 December 2025</span></center>
In <span class="news-text_italic-underline">MacInnes and another v DWF Law LLP [2025] EWHC 3252 (SCCO)</span>, the claimants brought solicitor–client detailed assessment proceedings under the <span class="news-text_italic-underline">Solicitors Act 1974</span>. An unless order required the defendant firm to disclose a complete digital copy of its files relating to the instructions described in the amended invoices. A dispute arose as to whether WhatsApp communications fell within the scope of that disclosure obligation.
The defendant solicitors argued that WhatsApp messages did not form part of the file because they were not saved or recorded within the firm’s documentation management system. The claimants contended that the messages were chargeable communications and therefore part of the file that should have been disclosed.
Costs Judge Nagalingam held that the defendant firm was in breach of the unless order. The court rejected the argument that the scope of the file was limited to material uploaded to internal systems. The appropriate inquiry was what the client had been billed for. Where a charge was raised to the client, the related communication formed part of the file.
On reviewing the defendant firm’s ledger, the judge found that charges had been raised for sending WhatsApp messages. The court also expressed concern that invoices appeared to include claims for instant messaging communications presented as routine emails. As a result, the defendant was found to have failed to provide complete disclosure and was debarred from participating in the substantive detailed assessment hearing.
The judgment highlights the risks for practitioners who use WhatsApp and similar platforms without a formal policy for recording communications. Reference was made to guidance issued by the Solicitors Regulation Authority on the use of instant messaging. The court endorsed the view that where a firm chooses to use such platforms in place of traditional communication methods, it should have a means of recording and evidencing those communications. The judge noted that this can be achieved through features such as WhatsApp’s export chat function.
The court observed that disclosure orders in <span class="news-text_italic-underline">Solicitors Act</span> proceedings do not need to be overly prescriptive at the outset. At the time an order is made, neither the court nor the paying party will know how the bill is broken down. Once that breakdown is produced, disclosure and inspection should extend to all matters for which the client has been charged and not merely to documentation uploaded to a firm’s internal systems.
