header-logo header-logo

Costs curbed in defamation claims

01 October 2009
Issue: 7387 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

New measures aimed at tackling excessive legal fees in “no win, no win” defamation proceedings have come into effect.

About 220 defamation claims are lodged in the High Court each year, and the Ministry of Justice estimates a further 80 claims are settled before court proceedings are issued.

Defendants often choose to settle claims rather than risk facing potentially huge libel costs.

From this week, there are three major changes: early notice if “after the event” (ATE) insurance has been taken out; a 40-day cooling-off period where, if the defendant admits liability and settlement is reached, the ATE premiums won’t be payable by the defendant; and a mandatory costs budgeting pilot for defamation proceedings, with close judicial supervision.

Justice Secretary Jack Straw says: “The government is taking action to ensure that, where ATE insurance is taken out, defendants are notified as early as possible, and given the opportunity to reach a settlement without being liable for the insurance premiums.

"As recommended by the Civil Procedure Rules Committee, publication proceedings will also be part of

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll