header-logo header-logo

12 July 2018 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 7801 / Categories: Opinion , Costs
printer mail-detail

Careful what you sign for

nlj_7801_comment

Dominic Regan warns against hubris & the dangers of self-representation

Ms Jagrit Bamrah set up her own litigation practice on 3 July 2008. It is always a challenge to take the plunge and work for oneself. Where will the work come from? Fortuitously, exactly one week later she gained a client—herself.

While visiting a client she tripped over at premises owned by Gempride Limited. No bones were broken. Injury was soft tissue only. It is surprising that subsequently the claimant produced a schedule claiming £900,000, but we must consider that later.

Acting for oneself

The claimant was fortunate to have the luxury of before the event (BTE) insurance, which meant that she would have the benefit of free legal representation. However, she decided that she would act upon her own behalf. Her insurers indicated that their chosen solicitor, Irwin Mitchell, would act at a reasonable rate of £135 per hour. The claimant sought to persuade the insurer to instruct her, and at her rate which she put at £232.

Bizarrely, the claimant then

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

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll