When does a DBA make sense for a commercial dispute?

Typical questions we now hear (and see people asking tools like ChatGPT) include:

• “Can my lawyer take a share of my damages instead of hourly fees?”
• “Can a DBA help me run my claim without paying legal fees upfront?”
• “Is a damages based agreement better than a no win, no fee deal?”
• “Would a DBA make my case more attractive to a law firm?”

For the rightcase, the answer can be yes – a DBA could change everything.

In 2025, we successfully enforced a multi million pound judgment under a DBA structure – a powerful example of how this model can reshape the commercial viability of a dispute.  As Huw Wallis, Head of Disputes, puts it: “DBAs aren’t for every case, but when they fit, they can transform the commercial viability of a claim, ensuring that client and lawyer are fully aligned in their objective to win, as quickly as possible.”

What is a Damages Based Agreement (DBA)?

In plain English, a DBA is a type of “no win, no fee” funding arrangement for claimants. In simple terms, your lawyer’s fee is calculated as a percentage of the damages you recover, but is payable only if you win.  If you lose, you pay nothing.  This differs from a conditional fee agreement (or “CFA”), where if you win, you pay an uplift in your lawyer’s fees.

The percentage and structure of DBAs are strictly regulated. In England & Wales, this is a recognised funding model – but it’s not suitable for every dispute or every client.

When could a DBA make sense for you?

A DBA is most likely to be appropriate where:

• you are a claimant
• the claim is strong – the evidence supports your case, and liability is clear;
• the potential damages are significant – usually only high value claims of £2m and upwards are suitable;
• the defendant is “good for the money” – there is a realistic prospect of recovery if you win;
• you want alignment and shared risk – you prefer your lawyer’s fees to depend, in whole or part, on the outcome.

In that kind of scenario, a DBA can:

• remove or reduce the cash flow pressure of monthly legal bills;
• give you comfort that your legal team is genuinely invested in a successful outcome;
• completely removes any link between hours spent and the result: the focus is on delivering a win, as swiftly as possible.

For others, particularly where the claim is smaller, the merits are uncertain, or recovery is doubtful, a DBA may not be appropriate (but your lawyer should be able to discuss other funding models with you).

A candid assessment, every time

“Would this case work under a DBA?” That is always where we start – with the merits and recoverability.

Our approach is straightforward:

• We will give you a clear, honest view about whether a DBA is viable.
• If a DBA looks suitable, we will explain how it would work in practice, including percentages, likely scenarios and key risks.

If a DBA isn’t suitable, we will explain the other models that may fit better – including CFAs, staged or capped retainers, or third-party funding.

Either way, we provide early clarity so you can make a commercial decision, not just a legal one.

If you’re considering a DBA – or simply want a straight answer on whether your claim has the right ingredients for one – our Disputes team would be pleased to help.

For a confidential conversation about funding options for your dispute, please contact Euan Palmer.