What is the legal test for reducing the contingency fee payable to a law firm in a civil matter?

Registrar Cameron recently considered this matter in McQuarrie Hunter v. Parpatt, 2011 BCSC 800. In that case, the learned Registrar reduced the fee to the law firm to “maintain the integrity of the profession and to arrive at a fee that is reasonable” (at para. 73). In that case, the learned Registrar felt that a 100% premium on the time spent by the law firm to the date of settlement was reasonable. In my view, that decision must be read in its particular context and circumstances. In general, in my view, it is imperative that parties be held to the bargain they made. Solicitors who enter into contingency fee arrangement should be able to do so with confidence; knowing that, if their bargain is fair and reasonable, it will, for the most part, be upheld. This applies equally to clients who, in entering into agreements with their counsel, must be able to move forward in their matter knowing exactly how the fees are to be calculated and thus make reasoned decisions regarding settlement of their matter knowing they cannot be charged any more than a set percentage of recovery.