header-logo header-logo

26 July 2023
Issue: 8035 / Categories: Legal News , Costs , Procedure & practice , Inquests , CPR
printer mail-detail

Fixed costs views sought

Lawyers have been asked for their views on the extension to the fixed recoverable costs (FRC) regime on 1 October, including inquest costs and advocacy fees for cases that settle late.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) launched a consultation last week on ‘FRC: issues relating to the new regime’. It asks whether costs on assessment should be fixed, and whether there should be fixed costs for costs-only (Part 8) claims, an area where the MoJ believes there is ‘a gap’.

The MoJ also seeks views on the recoverability of inquest costs in Fatal Accident Act (FAA) cases and restoration of companies to the register proceedings. On inquest costs, the MoJ recognises that ‘an inquest will typically pre-date, and may (to an extent at least) enable the litigation.

‘In particular, in the multi-track where FRC do not apply, the costs involved in an inquest would be recoverable, whereas no such provision is currently available in the fast track or the intermediate track. As such, in the extended FRC regime, those dealing with FAA cases will no longer recover any inquest costs as they can do now’. The MoJ recognises ‘this could mean that the level of costs involved in the inquest will make the pursuit of any claim for compensation uneconomic, or that, if a bereaved individual’s claim is pursued, they will need to fund most of (if not all) of the costs involved in the representation at the inquest’.

On recoverability of advocates’ preparation costs where cases are settled late or vacated, the MoJ agrees there is merit in the Bar Council’s proposal that trial advocacy preparation fees be recoverable in full if settled or vacated on the day of trial, and 75% recoverable if settled or vacated two days before. However, it seeks more evidence on such a change and its impact.

The MoJ also seeks views on whether fees should be further uprated for inflation, and whether to make an explicit rule that early admissions of liability in clinical negligence cases must be in the pre-action protocol letter of response.

The consultation, due to close on 8 September, can be viewed here.

Issue: 8035 / Categories: Legal News , Costs , Procedure & practice , Inquests , CPR
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Winckworth Sherwood—Charlotte Coleman & Qaisar Sheikh

Winckworth Sherwood—Charlotte Coleman & Qaisar Sheikh

Two promoted to partner in property litigation and education teams

Dorsey & Whitney LLP—Peter Knust

Dorsey & Whitney LLP—Peter Knust

Cross-border finance and restructuring specialist joins as of counsel in London

Powell Gilbert—Callum Beamish-Lacey

Powell Gilbert—Callum Beamish-Lacey

IP firm promotes litigator to partnership

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll