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

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll