Libel fees cap “arbitrary”

After the Jackson Report was published last month justice secretary Jack Straw announced proposals to introduce a 10% cap on conditional fee agreements (CFAs) in libel cases. He has established a 17-strong working group of high-profile media lawyers and newspaper editors to examine the potential reforms.

However, the proposals have come under fire from Lawyers for Media Standards (LMS)—a group s, including Collyer Bristow and Russell, Jones and Walker (RJW)—who oppose a 10% cap. The group will consider bringing a judicial review if the proposal is implemented.

Jeremy Clarke-Williams, partner at RJW, said: “I’m not sure what’s magical about publication proceedings, why has this area of law been singled out?
“One never recovers the full costs. These are assessed by the court and negotiated with an opponent and are usually 70 or 80% of the actual figure. Therefore 10% doesn’t actually bring you back to square one.”

Clarke-Williams says the idea that solicitors are collecting huge fees on CFA cases is a “misconception” since the 100% success fee applies at trial, and most cases settle at an early stage.

“10% is arbitrary,” he says. “The whole idea of CFAs was to get people to assess risk. If you have a flat success fee then you eliminate the staging of risk.” Full story online at www.newlawjournal.co.uk
 

• Add new comment
• Printer-friendly version