The express settled out of court...you are suggesting they actually went to court and then settled....you have provided no cite to support your claim that the court hearing was to start the libel case..
The express solicitors would have seen all the claims and evidence from CR...they then decide to defend or not....if they decide to defend a date is set. Before that date the solicitors for the Express would spend hours ..days preparing their case...you are suggesting having done all this they walked into court and immediately capitulated...you are claiming all this as fact with no cite....far more likely that they settled out of court and the court was set simply to grant a court order re the out of court agreement
This secondary argument isn't really important, though, is it? The interesting bit is what Adam Tudor said;
We sent the complaints to The Express and The Star,
at which point we were acting on a normal retainer. We indicated to Kate and Gerry and we told The Express and The Star at that time that if the matter was not resolved
we would indeed go on to a no win, no fee arrangement.It is quite clear that Carter-Ruck were being paid for their work whichever way you look at it. They were paid by retainer or by a CFA. At no point did they offer or provide any work free of charge.
In order to be described as 'pro bono' the solicitor's work has to be done without payment being made by anyone, client or defendant.That's my last word on the subject unless someone can find a definition of 'pro bono' which differs from this;
professional work undertaken voluntarily and
without payment.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro_bono