header-logo header-logo

14 December 2012 / Karl Tonks
Issue: 7542 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

A balanced approach?

Karl Tonks makes the case for independent legal advice in personal injury cases

Proposals to arbitrarily slash fees in the portal and the fast track will irrevocably damage access to justice for many genuine victims of injury. The fees which have been proposed do not reflect the work involved and only serve to cut independent legal advice from the system.

This is a worrying prospect for members of the public, as without proper legal advice, their access to justice will be severely restricted, if not denied altogether. The government has not made its case for why the fees should be cut and is only proposing to do so because insurers have said they should be cut.

The consultation is proceeding on a false premise that the incoming ban on referral fees will result in a saving from the fixed fee. But referral fees were never included in the original fee negotiations and many firms do not even pay them.

Shared concerns

Our concerns about the proposed fees are not just shared by other

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll