header-logo header-logo

24 February 2017 / Agata Usewicz
Issue: 7735 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Inconvenient truths

nlj_7735_ucewicz

The consultation on fixed recoverable costs in lower value clinical negligence claims ignores the role of the NHSLA, says Agata Usewicz

The timing of the Department of Health’s long-awaited consultation Introducing Fixed Recoverable Costs in Lower Value Clinical Negligence Claims raised more than a few eyebrows when it was launched at the end of January, not least because the consultation will open and close before the National Audit Office’s (NAO) investigation into the operations and efficiencies of the NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA) will report its findings.

While we can all be thankful that the proposed cap is set at £25,000, rather than the £250,000 which had been mooted prior to the consultation, there remains a very real risk that vulnerable and already disadvantaged groups of people will simply not be able to access justice.

Anomalous exemption

One thing that strikes me as particularly anomalous in the consultation is that one of the very few proposed exemptions to fixed recoverable costs is child fatalities. While I wholeheartedly agree that these should not be capped, nor should any type

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll