header-logo header-logo

Case conundrum?

17 November 2011
Issue: 7490 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

APIL warns of the “ominous formula” of legal reforms

Non-lawyers at claims management firms could be left in charge of running complex personal injury cases in future as a result of government reforms, legal campaigners have claimed.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) issued a dire warning this week about the future for victims of negligence as a result of the Legal Aid Bill and the ban on referral fees in personal injury cases.

“Proposed reforms to the way people can fund legal cases plus a ban on referral fees is an ominous formula which could lead to marketing men at claims management companies actually running personal injury cases,” says APIL president, David Bott.

“If proposals going through Parliament come into force, new options for funding legal cases will be available and will allow inexperienced and unqualified people to start running cases until the point they go to court. Claims management companies are very good at advertising legal services, but they’re not lawyers. These businesses won’t be making any money from referral fees after they are banned, so will need to do something else to survive.

“Changes in the current Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill will open the door for them to start handling cases themselves.”

APIL called for personal injury to be made a “reserved activity”—only open to appropriately qualified legal professionals—in its response to the Legal Services Board consultation, “Enhancing consumer protection”, which closed for comments at the beginning of November.

Bott says: “A claims management company would need to settle a case to recover the costs and stay in business.

“The case would have to be taken over by a solicitor when it gets as far as court, so they will want to settle before it gets that far. This could mean cases are under-settled and injured people don’t receive all the damages they need for their future care.”

Issue: 7490 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll