header-logo header-logo

15 April 2010 / Stuart Kightley
Issue: 7413 / Categories: Opinion , Costs
printer mail-detail

The Big (PI) Issue

If a 584-page report can be distilled into one basic question it is this: who should meet the cost of funding personal injury litigation?

If a 584-page report can be distilled into one basic question it is this: who should meet the cost of funding personal injury litigation?

Sir Rupert answers his own question emphatically: defendants should no longer meet the cost of these additional liabilities, and the Back to the Future solution is for the burden to fall onto the individual claimant.

What has changed in 10 years that makes it now so iniquitous that defendants should continue to pay success fees and after the event (ATE) premiums?

Liability insurers have certainly complained long and loud over this additional expense and the system has been mired in satellite litigation.
Success fee percentages have gone down over this period, so that in the vast majority of PI cases success fees are fixed at 12.5% or 25%. ATE premiums have, however, increased significantly, partly because

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