header-logo header-logo

Change of plan on fixed costs?

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

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

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll