Source: http://docplayer.net/1527227-Access-to-justice-adam-smith-institute-balancing-the-risks-briefing-paper-executive-summary-introduction-by-anthony-barton.html
Timestamp: 2017-06-28 22:56:44
Document Index: 101344804

Matched Legal Cases: ['UKHL ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'UKSC ', 'UKSC ', 'art 2', 'EWCA ', 'UKPC ', 'ART 44', 'ART 44']

Access to Justice ADAM SMITH INSTITUTE. Balancing the Risks BRIEFING PAPER. Executive Summary. Introduction. By Anthony Barton - PDF
Download "Access to Justice ADAM SMITH INSTITUTE. Balancing the Risks BRIEFING PAPER. Executive Summary. Introduction. By Anthony Barton"
Caren Sparks
1 BRIEFING PAPER ADAM SMITH INSTITUTE Access to Justice Balancing the Risks By Anthony Barton Executive Summary The Government is presently conducting a major spending review: claimants so that defendant costs can be excessive and disproportionate. Claimants can enjoy risk free litigation. The excessive and disproportionate costs of civil litigation are bringing the law into disrepute. every part of government and every spending programme will have to answer a series of probing questions. Is the activity essential to meet Government priorities? Do the Government need to fund that activity? Does the activity provide substantial economic value? Can the activity be targeted to those most in need? How can the activity be provided at a lower cost? How can the activity be provided more effectively? Can the activity be provided by a non-state provider or by citizens, wholly or in partnership? Can non-state providers be paid to carry out the activity according to the results that they achieve? And can local bodies as opposed to central Government provide the activity? The answers to those questions will inform a fundamental reassessment of the way in which government works (George Osborne; House of Commons, 8 June 2010) The time is right for a fundamental review of the funding of access to civil justice. Ten years ago the Adam Smith Institute published Privatizing Access to Justice when the Access to Justice Act 1999 was passed. The Act proposed the reduction of legal aid funding for civil claims and the expansion of conditional fee agreements, popularly known as no win, no fee, effectively replacing state funding of access to civil justice by private funding, particularly in personal injury litigation. Since then: The conditional fee system overall has been successful in providing access to justice, but The balance of litigation risk between claimant and defendant has been distorted in favour of Lord Justice Jackson has prepared a Review of Civil Litigation Costs. The key proposals require primary legislation: they are impractical and unfair; they have not been adequately costed. Civil legal aid continues to fail; it does not ensure access to justice and provides dubious value for money. Legal aid is unfair; it lacks independence and accountability. Civil legal aid should be abolished for most compensation claims. The solution is to correct the risk imbalance between claimant and defendant within the framework of the existing conditional fee system - to devise a system of funding access to justice that is simple, robust, fair, accessible, affordable, and with costs proportionate to the damages at stake. This briefing paper proposes that the level of additional costs specifically success fees and after the event (ATE) insurance recoverable from unsuccessful defendants should be capped. This would stop claimants from bringing weak cases with no risk to themselves, while preserving access to justice in the absence of civil legal aid. Introduction Legal rights are only meaningful if they can be asserted. Litigation is expensive; most people cannot afford to go to law, and require external funding. The challenge is to devise a system of funding access to civil justice that is simple, robust, fair, accessible, affordable, and with costs proportionate to the damages at stake. Adam Smith Institute - The free-market thinktank 23 Great Smith Street, London, SW1P 3BL +44 (0) August 20102 The Economics of Civil Litigation Litigation is risky. The general rule is that the loser pays the winner s costs (legal costs and disbursements such as experts fees); this rule is known as the loser pays rule or costs follow the event. The Court of Appeal has commented on this rule: The principle was of fundamental importance in deterring plaintiffs from bringing and defendants from defending actions they were likely to lose. (Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Roache v News Group Newspapers Ltd [1998] EMLR 161) and: The party who substantially loses the case is ordinarily obliged to pay the legal costs necessarily incurred by the winner. Thus hopeless claims and defences are discouraged, a willingness to compromise is induced and the winner keeps most of the fruits of victory. But the position is different where one or both parties to the case are legally aided... (Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Ridehalgh v Horsefield [1994] Ch 205 at 225) The two main components of costs are: Claimant s own legal costs Liability for the opponent s costs Access to justice is concerned not only funding the individual s own legal costs but dealing with his risk of meeting his opponent s costs if the case is lost. The challenge is to apportion the risks of litigation fairly between the parties. Legal Aid Our legal aid system is the most generous in the world; the recent rate of increase in expenditure is no longer sustainable. Legal aid has been subject to political scrutiny: Legal aid does not ensure access to justice for deserving cases, as most people are not eligible. Instead, it provides access to lawyers for an eligible minority. Legal aid lacks independence. Funding is granted on the advice of the applicant s lawyer, so there is a clear conflict of interest that may encourage over-optimistic advice, to put it kindly, or speculative litigation, putting it less kindly. Legal aid lacks fairness. Successful defendants cannot recover legal costs. Legal aid puts the claimant in a no-lose position and the health service defendant in a no-win position. It may be cheaper to settle a claim regardless of merit, to avoid irrecoverable legal costs a practice known as legal aid blackmail Legal aid lacks accountability. Funding decisions involving public money are privileged and confidential, and are not subject to public scrutiny. As a Member of Parliament, I have sought to question some of the decisions made by the Legal Services Commission about the people to whom they grant legal aid. Frankly, that is an impenetrable question. The fact that it has met and made a decision is regarded by the Legal Services Commission as justification enough Legal aid has brought relief to many people, but it is a popular misconception to equate legal aid with access to justice. Access to justice is not best delivered by the legal aid system. There is a better way to do that (Andrew Lansley, House of Commons, 5 June 2006) The courts have also been critical of legal aid: Legal aid was introduced after World War II as part of state funded services for those of modest means. Legal aid is granted where stringent financial eligibility criteria are satisfied and the case considered to have reasonable prospects of success based on advice of the claimant s lawyer. Civil legal aid for compensation claims is confined to certain types of action such as clinical negligence, and group actions where there is a wider public interest. There is an overriding discretion to grant. The legally aided claimant enjoys costs protection: the loser pays rule does not generally apply. the effective immunity against adverse costs orders enjoyed by legally-aided claimants was always recognised to place an unfair burden on a privately-funded defendant resisting a legally-aided claim, since he would be liable for both sides costs if he lost and his own even if he won. Most seriously of all, the cost to the public purse of providing civil legal aid had risen sharply, without however showing an increase in the number of cases funded or evidence that legal aid was directed to cases which most clearly justified the expenditure 2 Adam Smith Institute3 of public money. (emphasis added; Lord Bingham, Callery v Gray [2002] UKHL 28, at paragraph 1) The legal aid system has fundamental flaws: Does not ensure access to justice; provides access to lawyers for eligible minority Conflict of interest: advice on prospects of success provided by claimant lawyers Perverse incentives for over-optimistic advice (low success rates of cases) Costs protection inherently unfair: risks of litigation borne only by defendant case wins and nothing if the case loses. The loser pays rule applies; there is liability for costs if case loses. However, after the event (ATE) insurance is available to meet exposure to such risk of costs liability as well as the costs of own disbursements (like expert fees or other expenses). The success fee and the ATE insurance premium are known as additional costs. The level of the success fee, the choice of insurance product and the price of the insurance premium are determined by the claimant. The costs of the success fee and the ATE insurance premium are now borne by the unsuccessful defendant (in addition to the usual claimant s legal base costs) under the Access to Justice Act The ATE insurance premium is in practice not met by the unsuccessful claimant it is either self-insured or waived when a claim fails. Claimant in no lose position, defendant in no win position Demand led open ended funding promotes risk-free speculative litigation Legal aid blackmail ; cases settled by defendant to avoid irrecoverable legal costs Finding decisions privileged and confidential; no public scrutiny of public spending Financial control of overall cost of legal aid by budget and salami-slicing ; does not address fundamental flaws The economic and political reality is that alternative systems of funding need to be developed without resort to state money. The time has come for abolishing legal aid for most compensation claims. Conditional Fee Agreements Conditional fee agreements ( CFAs popularly known as no win, no fee ) were introduced in 1995 for MINELAs (middle income not eligible for legal aid) to plug the gap in access to justice many people who could afford to pay taxes were priced out of civil justice. The CFA system ought to operate as a robust, independent, self-funding, system with appropriate incentives imposing commercial discipline. The CFA system has strengths: No eligibility criteria; available to all Payment by result imposing commercial incentive Loser pays costs rule applies imposing commercial discipline Privatised access to justice, no direct cost to state The politically acceptable operation of CFAs depends on balancing fairly the risks between the claimant and defendant. If the balance is too favourable to defendants (as where success fees and ATE insurance were wholly borne by the successful claimant prior to the Access to Justice Act 1999 paid out of damages) this may limit access to justice so that meritorious cases may not be advanced. If the balance is too favourable to claimants (as now, where success fees and ATE insurance premium are borne by the unsuccessful defendant) it may promote speculative litigation. In practice CFAs exacerbate and distort the risks of litigation. The system now provides effectively risk free litigation for claimants the risks are borne by the claimant lawyers and the ATE insurers who accordingly pass on the costs to the unsuccessful defendant. The CFA system thus has weaknesses: The concept of conditional fees is based on uplifted legal fees in the event of success, not a proportion of the damages award. The claimant s lawyer can charge an additional success fee up to 100% of the legal costs if the Claimant sets price of ATE insurance premium which is only ever paid by defendant; no price incentive Claimant sets level of success fee which is only ever paid by defendant; no cost incentive 3 Adam Smith Institute4 There is widespread concern that the balance of risk is not right, that there is over-generous recovery of success fees and ATE insurance premiums. The Court of Appeal has commented thus: It is highly desirable in the interests of justice that an effective and transparent market should develop in ATE insurance. If the litigant is not at risk as to the premium... it is less easy for a competitive market to develop. Nonetheless, we consider that the solicitor advising the client should be in a position to assist him in selecting ATE insurance cover that caters for his needs on reasonable terms... We would... hope that before long the exercise of choice will result in competition for ATE business which establishes transparent market rates. (Lord Phillips MR at paragraph 15, Callery v Gray (no 2) [2001] EWCA Civ 1246) This hope has not been realised. The Court of Appeal commented in greater detail: There is very little incentive for solicitors to look for the best value in ATE insurance. (Lady Justice Smith at paragraphs 126 to128, Rogers v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2006] EWCA Civ 1134) These concerns apply especially to clinical negligence and defamation cases. Lord Justice Jackson s report: Review of Civil Litigation Costs The review was set up by a previous Master of the Rolls; it was not requested by Parliament and it does not appear to be part of any legislative programme. Lord Justice Jackson states in his foreword: In some areas of civil litigation costs are disproportionate and impede access to justice. I therefore propose a coherent package of interlocking reforms, designed to control costs and promote access to justice. When the government of the day abolished legal aid for most personal injury actions and brought in the provisions of the Access to Justice Act 1999, my understanding was that it was intended that all claimants would have as good a means of access to the courts as a litigant who could afford to fund his claim from his own resources. This was to be achieved through CFAs and ATE However, I do not think it was the intention of Parliament that would-be claimants should be able to litigate weak cases without any risk whatsoever to themselves. But it seems to me that this is what is happening. ATE premiums are set on the basis of a high expected failure rate at trial. Even cases that are assessed at a prospect of success of only 51% receive ATE insurance. Thus the premiums have to be significantly higher than they would be if a more rigorous standard were applied. Often no premium has to be paid upfront. If the case is lost the premium is rarely paid. That practice inevitably increases the premiums even further. If the case is won, the premium is in principle recoverable from the liability insurer and, as this court has held in the instant case, if it was necessary for the claimant to take out ATE insurance and the solicitor has acted reasonably, the whole premium will be recovered Civil legal aid is not considered by the report. The report is mainly concerned with the operation of CFAs in personal injury, clinical negligence and defamation cases. It rightly identifies the two main drivers of disproportionate and excess costs as (1) excessive success fees; and, (2) excessive ATE insurance premiums. Lord Justice Jackson sets out three central proposals: 1. Abolish recoverability of the success fee so it is borne by the claimant; this requires primary legislation. 2. Abolish recoverability of the ATE insurance premium so it is borne by the claimant; this requires primary legislation. 3. Introduce one-way costs shifting (costs payable by unsuccessful defendant but not by unsuccessful claimant) so that the claimant is protected for costs; removes the need for ATE insurance and the ATE insurance premium. These proposals are based on shifting the additional cost onto the claimant however, the burden of the ATE insurance premium is considered too onerous and so is removed by abolishing the need for insurance at all through one-way costs shifting. These proposals introduce price incentive in respect of success fees. However, oneway cost shifting goes beyond addressing the problems of excessive premium; it changes the whole economic balance of civil litigation. 4 Adam Smith Institute5 Comment and Opinion In the late 1990s the Labour Government was proposing the privatisation of access to justice by removing legal aid for compensation claims and promoting CFAs. The legal professions were campaigning to protect their vested interests in legal aid; The Times on 16 October 1997 published an article No win, no fee justice will be a rip-off, says Bar chairman. How right he was. The item reported his warning of the public being ripped off by lawyers. The passing of the Access to Justice Act 1999 led to lawyers earning vast sums. Lawyers are very good at maximising income, working within the rules of whatever system. Any attempt to reform costs and rationalise legal incomes is characterised as an attack on justice. There have been too many expensive and protracted legal aid fiascos in which lawyers have been the only beneficiaries. Similarly access to justice is overpriced by the excesses of the CFA system. Michael Gove recognised years ago The real impediment to justice is the high level of legal fees (The Times, 4 May 1999). The problems of CFAs concern the high cost of success fees and ATE insurance premiums. These should be tackled directly (see below) by limiting, not abolishing their recoverability. Lord Justice Jackson s proposals are wide-ranging and could have massive unintended consequences; they are unworkable, and overcomplicated. The proposed one-way costs shifting is unfair; it threatens to open the floodgates to risk free speculative litigation the health service could be swamped with spurious claims that it would need investigate and defend at huge cost, or simply buy off to avoid irrecoverable costs costs blackmail. Why should any health service defendant spend say 12,000 in irrecoverable costs to defend successfully a speculative claim when it could be settled early for say 6,000? The million or so clinical adverse outcomes could be the subject of claims, instead of the several thousand negligence claims at present. This could represent de facto no fault compensation by the back door. The present system with all its excesses and imperfections does provide some control mechanism. Moreover, the proposed effective abolition of ATE insurance would mean that the expense of the claimant s own disbursements would not be insured if the case were unsuccessful. The proposed shifting of the additional costs liabilities requires primary legislation, repealing parts of the Access to Justice Act It would revert to the pre-1999 Act position where the additional liabilities were borne by the claimant; this situation was previously considered unsatisfactory, leading to the passing of the 1999 Act. However, Lord Justice Jackson proposes to deal with this by imposing one-way costs, making a bad situation even worse. The requirement for primary legislation is cumbersome and lacks flexibility. If Lord Justice Jackson s proposals are implemented and fail, even further primary legislation may be required. Lord Justice Jackson s proposals do not accord with political reality or economic feasibility. They conflict with legal dicta; they do not reflect Government thinking. A Solution A simple and elegant solution is to apportion the liability for additional costs between the parties (a sort of half-way house between the pre and post Access to Justice Act 1999 positions): this can be achieved by costs capping so that a proportion is recoverable from the defendant and the remainder has to be borne by the claimant. The additional costs liabilities to be borne by the successful claimant can be partly paid for by a modest uplift in general damages awards. This risk-sharing would impose some incentive on the claimant to ensure that success fees and ATE insurance premiums are not excessive it is the claimant who sets the level of the success fee and the ATE insurance premium. The costs capping approach can probably be achieved by secondary legislation or rules of court. The avoidance of primary legislation allows for flexibility for any necessary future adjustment. Indeed, the previous Government proposed capping in respect of the success fee in defamation cases. Conclusion Both the legal aid and the CFA systems are flawed in that they give rise to situations which are not economically sustainable or politically acceptable. There is no prospect of expansion of civil legal aid the indications are that there will be wide ranging public sector cutbacks. 5 Adam Smith Institute6 The present CFA system allows overgenerous recovery of success fees and ATE insurance premium against defendants; this can be readily reformed. The risks of litigation can be apportioned fairly between the parties by capping the level of the success fee and the ATE insurance premium recoverable from the defendant; the claimant will have price incentives. A capping of additional costs liabilities can be probably achieved by secondary legislation and/or rules of court. Lord Justice Jackson s proposed shifting of additional costs liabilities is impractical and requires primary legislation. These cost capping proposals will go some way to provide a system of funding access to justice that is simple, robust, fair, accessible, affordable and proportionate. The Government s proposed review of legal aid is part of a bigger scheme of public funding cuts. Accordingly it is crucial that any reform of civil costs regime in CFAs provides appropriate practical solutions. There should be an integrated review of funding access to civil justice which combines review of legal aid, reform of costs in CFAs and response to Lord Justice Jackson s Review of Civil Litigation Costs, and which addresses Lord Young s review of the operation of health and safety laws and the growth of the compensation culture. About the Author Anthony Barton is a medical practitioner and lawyer. His specialist interests include clinical negligence, pharmaceutical and medical device product liability, inquests, and funding access to civil justice. He is based in London and works as an independent legal consultant for a number of City law practices. He also advises litigation expenses insurers. He has written and lectured widely. He is one of the editors of the leading text Clinical Negligence edited by Powers Harris Barton. 6 Adam Smith Institute Similar documents
First published in the Solicitors Journal April 2011 Let us not bend with the remover to remove There are alternatives to Sir Rupert Jackson s recommendations that have the benefit that they might actually More information THE JACKSON REFORMS. Lord Justice Jackson s review of Civil litigation costs and the impact on insurers. Nicola Billen. The Jackson Reforms
THE JACKSON REFORMS Lord Justice Jackson s review of Civil litigation costs and the impact on insurers Nicola Billen The Jackson Reforms The current civil justice system Costs generally Funding models More information www.mcdermottqc.com Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: Implications for Personal Injury Litigation
www.mcdermottqc.com Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill covers a wide More information Proposals for Reform of Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales
Proposals for Reform of Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales Consultation Paper Response of JUSTICE February 2011 Q 1 Do you agree that CFA success fees should no longer be recoverable More information CFAs & ATE Policies Implications for Professional Indemnity Market
CFAs & ATE Policies Implications for Professional Indemnity Market Michael Lent Bond Pearce David Pipkin Temple Legal Protection Ltd July 2006 Indemnity principle Harold v Smith 1860 Gundry v Sainsbury More information professional negligence:
professional negligence: Conditional Fee Agreements (CFAs) Explained For CFAs not involving personal injury or clinical negligence, entered into from 1 April 2013. There is no avoiding the fact that court More information Supreme Court Judgment in Coventry and Ors v Lawrence and another [2015] UKSC 50
Alerter 24 th July 2015 Supreme Court Judgment in Coventry and Ors v Lawrence and another [2015] UKSC 50 The Supreme Court has handed down its Judgment in Coventry v Lawrence in which it considered the More information Pankhurst v White and MIB grotesque fee arrangements both sides paid the cost
Court of Appeal warning about no win no fee agreements Pankhurst v White and MIB grotesque fee arrangements both sides paid the cost On the 15 th December 2010, the Court of Appeal fired a warning shot More information Conditional Fee Arrangements, After the Event Insurance and beyond!
GUIDE TO FUNDING YOUR MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIM Because of the expert knowledge and depth of investigation required in order to bring a successful claim, negligence litigation can be expensive. Understandably, More information THE JACKSON REPORT ON CIVIL LITIGATION COSTS
ITEM NO: 9 Report To: AUDIT PANEL Date: 31 January 2012 Reporting Officer: Subject: Report Summary: Recommendations: Links to Community Strategy: Policy Implications: Financial Implications: (Authorised More information GUIDE TO NEW COSTS IN CIVIL CASE RULES GOVERNMENT REFORMS
GUIDE TO NEW COSTS IN CIVIL CASE RULES GOVERNMENT REFORMS MAKE SURE YOU GET INSURANCE Introduction Landlords faced with claims from tenants have also in the past had to often pay success fees where tenants More information Proposals for Reform of Civil Litigation Funding. Implementation of LJ Jacksons recommendations. (Consultation paper 13/10 November 2010)
Proposals for Reform of Civil Litigation Funding Implementation of LJ Jacksons recommendations (Consultation paper 13/10 November 2010) Following Lord Justice Jacksons report, the Ministry of Justice is More information Guide to litigation costs and funding
Guide to litigation costs and funding Contents Introduction Legal Aid Before the Event Insurance (BTE) Third Party Funding Paying for the claim yourself Alternative Billing Models (ABM) After the Event More information Major UK Government Proposals on Reform of Litigation Costs and Funding
Major UK Government Proposals on Reform of Litigation Costs and Funding Dr Christopher Hodges Head of the CMS Research programme on Civil Justice Systems Centre for Socio-Legal Studies University of Oxford More information CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS GUIDANCE
Disclaimer In all cases solicitors must ensure that any agreement with a client is made in compliance with their professional duties, the requirements of the SRA and any statutory requirements depending More information LEGAL AID, SENTENCING AND PUNISHMENT OF OFFENDERS BILL HOUSE OF LORDS COMMITTEE STAGE
LEGAL AID, SENTENCING AND PUNISHMENT OF OFFENDERS BILL HOUSE OF LORDS COMMITTEE STAGE 1. Executive summary The Bar Council s proposals for Part 2: Civil litigation funding and costs 1.1. The Bar Council More information FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE PRE CONSULTATION RESPONSE BY. Action against Medical Accidents
FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE PRE CONSULTATION RESPONSE BY Action against Medical Accidents Questionnaire The Government proposes to introduce fixed recoverable costs for all cases where More information Lord Justice Jackson s Review of Costs Liability SIG Lunchtime Lecture 17 February 2010 - Manchester
Lord Justice Jackson s Review of Costs Liability SIG Lunchtime Lecture 17 February 2010 - Manchester Slide 1 Good afternoon Ladies & Gentlemen. Lord Justice Jackson s Review of Costs. Will it happen? Certainly More information Briefing for the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill Committee. An interlocking package of reforms
Briefing for the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill Committee An interlocking package of reforms March 2012 Briefing for Members of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders More information EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS ORDER 2013. 2013 No. 689
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS ORDER 2013 2013 No. 689 1. This explanatory memorandum has been prepared by the Ministry of Justice and is laid before Parliament by Command of More information HER MAJESTY S COURTS SERVICE (HMCS) Part of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) CIVIL COURT FEES A RESPONSE BY THE ASSOCIATION OF PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS
HER MAJESTY S COURTS SERVICE (HMCS) Part of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) CIVIL COURT FEES A RESPONSE BY THE ASSOCIATION OF PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS June 2007 The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers More information DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS PROPOSALS FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: Implications for patients access to justice and for patient safety
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS PROPOSALS FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: Implications for patients access to justice and for patient safety Briefing by Action against Medical Accidents (AvMA) October More information EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2010. 2010 No. [Draft]
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS (AMENDMENT) ORDER 2010 2010 No. [Draft] 1. This explanatory memorandum has been prepared by the Ministry of Justice and is laid before Parliament More information Department of Justice for Northern Ireland Alternative Methods of Funding Money Damages Claims
Department of Justice for Northern Ireland Alternative Methods of Funding Money Damages Claims A response by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers June 2013 Page 1 of 8 The Association of Personal More information Conditional Fee Agreement: What You Need to Know
Conditional Fee Agreement: What You Need to Know This document forms an important part of your agreement with us. Please read it carefully. Definitions of words used in this document and the accompanying More information Costs Law Update Lamont v Burton
- The Defendant Costs Specialists Costs Law Update Lamont v Burton The Court of Appeal s decision last week in Lamont v Burton [2007] EWCA Civ 429 is likely to have serious costs implications for defendants More information The Litigation Advantage Scheme
After the Event Insurance for Clinical Negligence The Litigation Advantage Scheme from Temple Legal Protection We have been using Temple as providers of ATE insurance since 2001. The Scheme has worked More information Bar Council response to the Reducing Legal Costs in Clinical Negligence Claims pre-consultation paper
Bar Council response to the Reducing Legal Costs in Clinical Negligence Claims pre-consultation paper 1. This is the response of the General Council of the Bar of England and Wales (the Bar Council) to More information Conditional Fee Agreement: What You Need to Know
Conditional Fee Agreement: What You Need to Know This document forms an important part of your agreement with us. Please read it carefully. Definitions of words used in this document and the accompanying More information Short Form CFA based on "APIL/PIBA 9" for personal injuries and clinical negligence claims from 1.10.2013
EXPLANATION OF LEGAL TERMS Affidavit: After the event litigation insurance: Application notice: Bar Council: Barrister: Basic Charges: Before the Event Legal Expenses Insurance: Bill of costs: Bolam test: More information After the Event Insurance. for Clinical Negligence. Litigation Advantage ATE. Legal expenses insurance experts www.temple-legal.co.
After the Event Insurance for Clinical Negligence Litigation Advantage Legal expenses insurance experts ATE w Contents Temple Legal Protection After the Event Insurance from Temple Benefits of ATE Insurance More information briefing Guide to litigation funding
briefing Guide to litigation funding The potential cost of litigation can be a major deterrent to bringing or defending legal proceedings even where there is a good chance of succeeding. Cost can be the More information COST AND FEE ALLOCATION IN CIVIL PROCEDURE: Reporter: Richard Moorhead, Professor of Law, Cardiff University, Wales, UK
COST AND FEE ALLOCATION IN CIVIL PROCEDURE: REPORT FOR ENGLAND AND WALES Reporter: Richard Moorhead, Professor of Law, Cardiff University, Wales, UK INTRODUCTION This short report deals with the areas More information Advice Note. An overview of civil proceedings in England. Introduction
Advice Note An overview of civil proceedings in England Introduction There is no civil code in England; English civil law comprises of essentially legislation by Parliament and decisions by the courts. More information LASPO. Why has. come about brief history of reforms
Contents Foreword 2 3 Foreword: Why has LASPO come about 4 Changes to funding and implications 6 Changes in practice 7 Track limits 8 The RTA and EL/PL Protocols 11 Referral fees 12 Contact information More information APIL/PIBA CFA version 9, for personal injuries and clinical negligence claims, from 1.4.13,
SHORT FORM CFA for use BETWEEN SOLICITORS AND COUNSEL on or after 1 April 2013 in personal injuries and clinical negligence claims (This agreement is not suitable for claims for diffuse mesothelioma.) More information A Barracuda Company. UK edisclosure. A Business-Focussed Examinationof the April 2014 Reforms. White Paper
A Barracuda Company UK edisclosure A Business-Focussed Examinationof the April 2014 Reforms White Paper Overview This paper takes a look at the April 2013 Legal Reforms from a Business Aspect Lord Justice More information Implementation of the Jackson Reforms. The key changes.
March 2013 Implementation of the Jackson Reforms. The key changes. Introduction On 1 April 2013, a large tranche of the reforms proposed by the 2010 review of civil litigation costs by Lord Justice Jackson More information The four year assessment evaluating the outcome of The Jackson Review and LASPO on ATE, BTE and more. Tony Buss, Managing Director ARAG (UK)
The four year assessment evaluating the outcome of The Jackson Review and LASPO on ATE, BTE and more Tony Buss, Managing Director ARAG (UK) 1 Comments on Jackson [The Government s] are seeking to strike More information The Litigation Journey Wednesday 1 st October 2014 Keynote Speaker: Master Gordon-Saker
The Litigation Journey Wednesday 1 st October 2014 Keynote Speaker: Master Gordon-Saker Perhaps I can address costs budgeting first, as that is currently the greatest area of uncertainty. The reasons for More information Key aspects of the Jackson review and related reforms - progress update as at 3 rd September 2012
Key aspects of the Jackson review and related reforms - progress update as at 3 rd September 2012 In brief Lord Justice Jackson s key task was to address disproportionate costs in civil litigation i.e. More information Taylor Review. UNISON Scotland response to Review of Expenses and Funding of Civil Litigation in Scotland
Taylor Review UNISON Scotland response to Review of Expenses and Funding of Civil Litigation in Scotland March 2012 Taylor Review UNISON Scotland response to Review of Expenses and Funding of Civil Litigation More information Jackson how changes to the litigation landscape will affect you
Jackson how changes to the litigation landscape will affect you Nick Oliver, Howes Percival & Stephen Davies QC, Guildhall Chambers June 2011 The litigation landscape The winds of change are coming.. Overview More information Lord Justice Jackson s Review of Civil Litigation Costs
Lord Justice Jackson s Review of Civil Litigation Costs The eagerly awaited report of Lord Justice Jackson has now been published with the objective to carry out an independent review of the rules and More information Jackson, Costs & Funding:
Jackson, Costs & Funding: Attract & Retain Clients, Increase Billable Hours, Maximise Profits A CPD-accredited Seminar from 1 Mark Beaumont London office 1 Topics The Jackson Reforms Costs Management Hourly More information Damages Based Agreements: The Basics
Damages Based Agreements: The Basics The main provisions of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) came into force on the 1st April 2013 and promise to herald a major change More information Guide to compensation claims against the police
Tel: 020 8492 2290 I N C O R P O R A T I N G D O N A L D G A L B R A I T H & C O Guide to compensation claims against the police This guide is designed to provide a general overview to bringing compensation More information Common Myths About Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases 1. By B. Keith Williams
Common Myths About Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases 1 By B. Keith Williams There are several myths about accident cases and the attorneys that handle them. It is important to keep these myths in More information Hugh Price Legal Consulting
CAN AFTER THE EVENT INSURANCE CONTINUE IN ITS PRESENT FORM? First published in The Insurance Times, 28 03 2008 Over the past few years ATE has settled down but with the MoJ proposals for the future of More information LEGAL AID ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEW INTO ESTABLISHING A CONTINGENCY LEGAL AID FUND IN NORTHERN IRELAND
LEGAL AID ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEW INTO ESTABLISHING A CONTINGENCY LEGAL AID FUND IN NORTHERN IRELAND WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS 1. The Association of Personal Injury More information No win no fee: our proposition after Jackson
No win no fee: our proposition after Jackson February 2013 Cathy Hawkins Partner, BLM t: 020 7865 3308 e: cathy.hawkins@blm-law.com Offices Birmingham Bristol Cardiff Dublin Leeds Liverpool London Manchester More information Consultation Document Alternative Methods of Funding Money Damages Claims
Consultation Document Alternative Methods of Funding Money Damages Claims March 2013 1 CONTENT 1. Introduction 3 2. Purpose of Consultation 4 3. How to Respond 4 4. Current Position 6 5 Access to Justice More information REFORMING THE COMPENSATION SYSTEM A BETTER DEAL FOR CONSUMERS. October 2010
REFORMING THE COMPENSATION SYSTEM A BETTER DEAL FOR CONSUMERS October 2010 REFORMING THE COMPENSATION SYSTEM A BETTER DEAL FOR CONSUMERS 3 This is not access to justice this is incitement to litigate. More information Who are the winners?
If this email is displayed incorrectly or you are unable to view it's contents please click here. Who are the winners? Lord Justice Jackson's 557 page Final Report on civil litigation 13 January 2010 welcomed More information Delivering Justice in an Age of Austerity
Delivering Justice in an Age of Austerity A Report by JUSTICE Chair of the Committee The Rt. Hon Sir Stanley Burnton ANNEXE. SUMMARY NOTE ON LEGAL EXPENSES INSURANCE Introduction This note summarises More information Cost of Preferred (or more likely) Option Net cost to business per year (EANCB on 2009 prices) 0m N/A N/A No N/A
Dismissal of personal injury claims involving fundamental dishonesty IA No: MoJ 021/2014 Lead department or agency: Ministry of Justice Other departments or agencies: Impact Assessment (IA) Date: 6 June More information Limitation of Liability
Limitation of Liability Submission to the Attorney-General (Western Australia) July 2000 The Institution of Engineers, Australia Institution of Engineers, Australia 11 National Circuit, Barton, ACT, 2604 More information Legislative Council Panel on Administration of Justice and Legal Services. Further Expansion of the Supplementary Legal Aid Scheme
LC Paper No. CB(2)600/11-12(01) For discussion on 20 December 2011 Legislative Council Panel on Administration of Justice and Legal Services Further Expansion of the Supplementary Legal Aid Scheme PURPOSE More information Appendix two. Case law relating to the recoverability of ATE premiums
Keith Hayward 1 Appendix two Case law relating to the recoverability of ATE premiums Callery v Gray 1 and 2 [2001] (CA) The Issues: The Court of Appeal considered at what stage in a personal injury claim More information The New CFA and DBA Regime. Simon Edwards
The New CFA and DBA Regime Simon Edwards CFAs post 1 April 2013 Section 58A (6) Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 (CLSA) provides that a costs order made in proceedings may not include provision requiring More information Challenges to Solicitors charges in the post Jackson era
Challenges to Solicitors charges in the post Jackson era Keith Hayward Victory Legal Costs Solicitors Tel: 0844 980 1690 Fax: 0844 980 1691 Web: www.victorylegal.co.uk E-Mail: keith.hayward@victorylegal.co.uk More information Legal Services Board Referral fees, referral arrangements and fee sharing
Legal Services Board Summary Note Aviva has restricted its responses to Personal Injury. Aviva accepts there may be similarities in Conveyancing agreements but has no experience of these and so cannot More information The Professional Negligence Bar Association represents approximately 1,100 barristers
of the Professional Negligence Bar Association to the Legal Services Board Consultation Paper on referral fees, referral arrangements and fee sharing Introduction The Professional Negligence Bar Association More information CIVIL DISBURSEMENTS FUND GUIDELINES
CIVIL DISBURSEMENTS FUND GUIDELINES TABLE OF CONTENTS: Introduction... 2 Definition... 2 1. Selection of Cases... 2 2. Assessment of Applications... 2 3. Means Test... 3 4. Merits Test... 4 5. Contribution... More information 4. In Dymocks Franchise Systems (NSW) Pty Ltd v Todd [2004] UKPC 39 Lord Brown clarified:
Third Party Costs Orders against Solicitors 1. This article discusses the rise in applications against solicitors for third party costs orders, where solicitors have acted on conditional fee agreements More information LEGAL COSTS IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA'S WORKERS' COMPENSATION SCHEME
BLAKE DAWSON WALDRON SOLICITORS LEGAL COSTS IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA'S WORKERS' COMPENSATION SCHEME February 1997 Workcover Corporation,. Library Worl(Cove _. i00,waymouth Street toz.v.,.;4.'rk:iilatil Adelaide More information UK: Government Implementation of Jackson Reforms on the Costs and Funding of Litigation. Introduction of Contingency Fees and increased Mediation
UK: Government Implementation of Jackson Reforms on the Costs and Funding of Litigation. Introduction of Contingency Fees and increased Mediation The UK government made a series of announcements on 30 More information Expenses and Funding of Civil Litigation Bill Consultation Response by GCC
Expenses and Funding of Civil Litigation Bill Consultation Response by GCC (A) Speculative Fee Agreements: Q1: Do you think that a lack of cap on speculative fee agreements prevents potential pursuers More information Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA)
Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA) This agreement is a binding legal contract between you and your solicitor/s. Before you sign, please read everything carefully. This agreement must be read in conjunction More information Expert evidence. A guide for expert witnesses and their clients (Second edition)
Expert evidence A guide for expert witnesses and their clients (Second edition) Addendum, June 2009 1. Introduction 1.1 The second edition of this Guide was published in October 2003, in order to set out More information Conditional Fee Agreement ( CFA ) [For use in personal injury and clinical negligence cases only].
Disclaimer This model agreement is not a precedent for use with all clients and it will need to be adapted/modified depending on the individual clients circumstances and solicitors business models. In More information Reforming Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales Implementation of Lord Justice Jackson s Recommendations. The Government Response
Reforming Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales Implementation of Lord Justice Jackson s Recommendations The Government Response March 2011 1. Reforming Civil Litigation Funding and Costs More information Complaints in focus: No win, no fee agreements
Complaints in focus: No win, no fee agreements www.legalombudsman.org.uk DISPUTES ABOUT CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS AND THEIR CAUSES 1 Summary Over recent months, the Legal Ombudsman has become increasingly More information Enhanced court fees - briefing for MPs and Peers
Enhanced court fees - briefing for MPs and Peers For further information please contact: Iana Vidal (Public Affairs Adviser, the Law Society) T: 020 7316 5581, E: iana.vidal@lawsociety.org.uk Key Points More information 1. Liverpool Law Society
Response of Liverpool Law Society to the Competition and Markets Authority Private Motor Insurance Market Investigation Notice of Further Consultation on Remedy 1C 1. Liverpool Law Society Liverpool Law More information Response of the Association of Costs Lawyers to the consultation on the impact of the Jackson reforms on costs and case management
Response of the Association of Costs Lawyers to the consultation on the impact of the Jackson reforms on costs and case management 1. Introduction The Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL) broadly welcomes More information Pre-action Conduct of Litigation
Chapter 2: Pre-action Conduct of Litigation Outline 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Financing litigation 2.3 Pre-action protocols and the Practice- Direction on Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols 2.4 Protocols relevant More information GENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS
GENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS PART 44 PART 44 Contents of this Part Rule 44.1 Rule 44.2 Rule 44.3 Rule 44.3A Rule 44.3B Rule 44.3C Rule 44.4 Rule 44.5 Rule 44.6 Rule 44.7 Rule 44.8 Rule 44.9 Rule 44.10 Rule More information Controlling Costs in Defamation Proceedings Reducing Conditional Fee Agreement Success Fees
Controlling Costs in Defamation Proceedings Reducing Conditional Fee Agreement Success Fees Consultation Paper CP1/2010 Published on 19 January 2010 This consultation will end on 16 February 2010 Controlling More information Civil Litigation Reforms & AIG
Access to Justice Civil Litigation Reforms & AIG Start The reforms AIG Response day 1-5 day 6-20 day 21-25 AIG process map Overview and key Changes For more details of the reforms click here > The Jackson More information NOTES on Funding Your Claim
NOTES on Funding Your Claim Funding is important because with some forms of funding you might be required to pay costs (either to us or to the defendant). As such, we set out the options. For the reasons More information The Impact of the Jackson Reforms on Costs and Case Management
The Impact of the Jackson Reforms on Costs and Case Management Civil Justice Council Conference 21 st March 2014 Written Submission of the Law Society The Law Society 2014 Page 1 of 9 2014 The Law Society. More information REPORT OF SERVICE DIRECTOR, FINANCE AND PROCUREMENT PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS: JACKSON REFORMS TO THE CIVIL JUSTICE PROCEDURES
Report to Finance and Property Committee REPORT OF SERVICE DIRECTOR, FINANCE AND PROCUREMENT 25 February 2013 Agenda Item: 5 PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS: JACKSON REFORMS TO THE CIVIL JUSTICE PROCEDURES Purpose More information The Incorporated Law Society of Cardiff and District. Members Forum 30 January 2013 JACKSON REFORMS WHERE ARE WE NOW? Michael Imperato Simon Cradick
The Incorporated Law Society of Cardiff and District Members Forum 30 January 2013 JACKSON REFORMS WHERE ARE WE NOW? Michael Imperato Simon Cradick Agenda Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders More information Ministry of Justice Whiplash Reform Programme: consultation on independence in medical reporting and expert accreditation
Ministry of Justice Whiplash Reform Programme: consultation on independence in medical reporting and expert accreditation Question 1: Do you agree that the proposed amendments to paragraphs 7.1A(1) and More information Proposals for Reform of Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales
Proposals for Reform of Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales Kennedys response to the implementation of Lord Justice Jackson s recommendations 14 February 2011 Table of contents LEGAL More information Clinical Negligence Fixed Recoverable Costs Proposals Necessary or Not?
Clinical Negligence Fixed Recoverable Costs Proposals Necessary or Not? Introduction In July 2015 we published a paper regarding the NHS Litigation Authority Report and Accounts 2014/2015 ( the Report More information We agree that by not increasing small claims track hearing fees, the Government is ensuring access to justice is not compromised.
Ministry of Justice Consultation Court Fees: Proposals for Reform Response from the Motor Accident Solicitors Society January 2014 Introduction This response is prepared on behalf of the Motor Accident More information A Guide To Claiming Compensation For Clinical Negligence
A Guide To Claiming Compensation For Clinical Negligence Introduction In order to bring a claim for Clinical Negligence, it is necessary to establish that the Doctor or Nurse involved in your medical treatment More information CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL THE IMPACT OF THE JACKSON REFORMS ON COSTS AND CASE MANAGEMENT
Introduction CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL THE IMPACT OF THE JACKSON REFORMS ON COSTS AND CASE MANAGEMENT Submission by the Motor Accident Solicitors Society (MASS) March 2014 1. This response is prepared on behalf More information GADSBY WICKS SOLICITORS FUNDING THE CLAIM
FUNDING THE CLAIM This is an important issue because we know that many people are understandably very worried about incurring legal costs. But there is no need to worry about costs. Because of changes More information JUDICIAL REVIEW: A QUICK AND EASY GUIDE
Richard Stein Partner Leigh Day & Co Solicitors Priory House 25 St John s Lane London EC1M 4LB T 020 7650 1200 F 020 7253 4433 E fightthecuts@leighday.co.uk www.leighday.co.uk JUDICIAL REVIEW: A QUICK More information INFORMATION FOR CLIENTS ON FUNDING OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND LITIGATION
MFG SOLICITORS LLP INFORMATION FOR CLIENTS ON FUNDING OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND LITIGATION Cases which involve court proceedings are known as litigation. It is always difficult to estimate the likely costs More information CONSULTATION QUESTIONS
CONSULTATION QUESTIONS CHAPTER 1: PROPOSALS ARISING FROM SHERIFF PRINCIPAL TAYLOR S REVIEW A. SPECULATIVE FEE AGREEMENTS 1. Do you think that a lack of cap on speculative fee agreements prevents potential More information CONTINGENCY FEES AND DAMAGES-BASED
CONTINGENCY FEES AND DAMAGES-BASED AGREEMENTS 1 CONTINGENCY FEES AND DAMAGES-BASED AGREEMENTS The current regime 1. Contingency fee agreements have always been allowed in non-contentious work. Pre-issue More information Summary of the Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence Claims Market in England and Wales July 2015
Summary of the Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence Claims Market in England and Wales July 2015 Abstract: In this annual summary of the state of the Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence Claims Market More information USING LAWYERS IN HONG KONG
USING LAWYERS IN HONG KONG This Guide deals in general terms with using lawyers in Hong Kong. It aims to help a seafarer understand the legal profession in Hong Kong, and how to select, engage and if need More information 2017 © DocPlayer.net Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Feedback