header-logo header-logo

Costs changes ahead as "Scotland’s Jackson" reports

14 September 2013
Issue: 7576 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

The Taylor Review – Scotland’s version of the Jackson Review – has recommended the introduction of contingency fees and one-way cost-shifting.

The Review of expenses and funding of civil litigation in Scotland, conducted by Sheriff Principal James Taylor, makes 85 recommendations in total, including costs management pilots for commercial cases where judges will be required to play a greater role in costs management.

However, the most far-reaching change for Scottish solicitors will be ‘no win, no fee’ cases where the fee is calculated as a percentage of the damages recovered. The maximum percentages will be “set on a sliding scale in which the percentage reduces as the award increases”.

Currently, litigation can be funded by “speculative fee agreements”, which are similar to conditional fee agreements apart from that success fees and after-the-event insurance premiums cannot be recovered from the losing opponent.

The Review also recommends that a pursuer (claimant) in a personal injury action should no longer have to pay the defender’s (defendant’s) costs if the action fails because “fear [of the cost of legal action] can result in good claims not being pursued”.

It does not recommend an increase in general damages – in England and Wales, a ten per cent rise has been introduced. Nor does it support a ban on referral fees, which it says are “a fact of life”.

Taylor highlighted “contextual differences” between the Jackson Review and his own, including that there was a “different culture” of litigation in Scotland, which has proportionately far fewer clinical negligence, motor and employer liability and other civil claims than in England. There are no plans to withdraw civil legal aid from any areas in Scotland, in sharp contrast to the position in England and Wales.

John Barrie and Jenny Dickson, Scottish Representatives on the executive committee of the Forum of Insurance Lawyers (FOIL), said: “A number of the proposals in the Review appear to echo what has been introduced by the Jackson Reforms in England and Wales, despite the expenses landscape in Scotland being very different to that south of the Border.

“There is likely to be a considerable impact on the cost of claims in Scotland. The proposal to introduce no win no fee as a percentage of damages, linked with one way cost shifting may well lead to increased levels of settlement.”
 

Issue: 7576 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll