LilianNekipelov (asker) Jun 9, 2015:

Thank you, all. Absolutely, the Plaintiff can only waive her or his rights. An attorney has the right to attorney's fees, not a client, in my opinion. it sounds even more strange when translated into another language. The client can waive the right to reimbursement, fees being paid on her or his behalf, but I do not think they can waive the right to someone else's fees.

mike23 Jun 7, 2015:

WHEREFORE the Plaintiff claims that they have provided all of the services listed in the contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, the Defendants have refused to pay any of the amounts that the Defendants owe, despite repeated offers to settle this matter. The Plaintiffs request that the Court order the Defendants to pay part of the $16,618.32 that is owed to Plaintiffs. Plaintiff waives the right to the $6,618.32 that is above the $10,000.00 Small Claims threshold. The total a mount being sought by Plaintiffs in this complaint is $10,000.00Page 4note they did not send the orginal signed contract aggreemnt or terms.
http://www.justanswer.com/law/90u8m-live-florida-just-receiv...
Even where such notice is given, a plaintiff waives the right to such fees by asking for more than the specified amount at trial.
http://courts.mrsc.org/mc/courts/zappellate/044wnapp/044wnap...

B D Finch Jun 6, 2015:

@Lilian If that's the case, then the source text use of "waives" seems to be incorrect. The Plaintiff can only waive his own rights, not somebody else's. Suggestion: "The Plaintiff does not admit any liability to pay legal and/or expert fees on behalf of the Defendant."

LilianNekipelov (asker) Jun 6, 2015:

Hi, Charles. A matrimonial case, and the Defendant, for some reason, has paid most of the Plaintiff's fees, but he does not want to pay any future legal fees on her behalf.

mrachidi Jun 6, 2015:

There is a concession from the part of the plaintiff not pay in his/her behalf any more fees incurred by the defendant through litigation or arbitration.

Charles Davis Jun 5, 2015:

@Lilian This is curious. What stage have proceedings reached? Are they settling a civil suit? That's what it sounds like: a settlement conditional on fee waiver (by the plaintiff): absolutely standard stuff. But how come the defendant has already paid some of the plaintiff's fees? Normally that would only happen if the case has already come to judgment and the court had made an award, in which case they can't be settling. What's going on?

LilianNekipelov (asker) Jun 5, 2015:

Better options are welcome, too. I just wanted to add that the original phrase ends here—no further explanation as to who has incurred or will be incurring the fees or expenses.

LilianNekipelov (asker) Jun 5, 2015:

The problem is that the fees, a portion of them, were paid by the Defendant, even though they had been incurred by the Plaintiff. Would that change anything? The Defendant agreed to pay a portion of the fees, but they will not pay any future fees, should any be incurred.

LilianNekipelov (asker) Jun 5, 2015:

Yes, a future award. It still sounds awkward. perhaps "any future legal and expert fees the plaintiff may incur' but without it, it does not sound right to me, and it is even more confusing when translated into another language.

B D Finch Jun 5, 2015:

Not at all ambiguous The Plaintiff is waiving the right to apply to the court for legal and expert fees incurred by him/her to be paid by the defendant. Were the court to order such a payment, it would be called an award: not "reimbursement" and not "on the Plaintiff's behalf".

LilianNekipelov (asker) Jun 5, 2015:

See, I think it is ambiguous, in the least. The legal fees and the expert fees are fees to be paid to be paid by Someone else on the Plaintiff's behalf was supposed to pay the fees. I think a phrase like "reimbursement of legal and expert fees', or 'fees to be paid on the Plaintiff's behalf 'is missing. What do you think?