header-logo header-logo

19 October 2016
Issue: 7719 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Change of plan on fixed costs?

CPRC meeting minutes reveal govt is rethinking clinical neglience claims proposals

The government is considering rowing back from plans for fixed recoverable costs for clinical negligence claims up to £100,000.

Instead, fixed costs would be introduced for claims up to £25,000.

The change of plan was revealed this week in minutes distributed from a July meeting of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC). Item 4 reports a change in policy at the Department of Health, which intends to consult in respect of claims up to £25,000 (accounting for about 60% of clinical negligence claims). 

Nina Ali, clinical negligence partner at Hodge, Jones & Allen, said: “At first glance this is of course a welcome change of policy. 

“However, unless there is a proper and effective consultation and ultimately acceptance that there are a number of case types that must be made exceptions of, this change of policy and playing with numbers is meaningless.”
Ali emphasised that it was important not to equate the complexity or the importance of a case with its financial value. Complex cases often fall below the £25,000 threshold, for example, those involving fatalities, human rights, the elderly and people with disabilities.

“Fatal cases can also involve inquests and human rights issues,” she said. “Where the deceased is a person with no earnings, the claim is inevitably going to be lower in strict financial terms than if they were a wealthy individual, for example, a company director in their 30s with dependents.”

Legal aid is not available for clinical injury claims, with the exception of birth injuries.

The Department of Health declined to comment but confirmed that it will be consulting on different thresholds for fixed costs.

The Department initially planned to introduce fixed costs up to £100,000. CPRC minutes from July 2015 show that the intended implementation date, if the plans were agreed, was October 2016. The Department was then exploring whether to consult on a limit of £250,000. It said legal costs were too high, at £260m or 22% of the total spend on clinical negligence in the year 2013/14. 

Issue: 7719 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

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
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
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
back-to-top-scroll