header-logo header-logo

23 March 2022
Issue: 7972 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Ministers step back from whiplash reform

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has dropped plans for further reforms to whiplash claims for the time being, prompting relief among claimant personal injury lawyers

Publishing its delayed response to the second part of its consultation ‘Reforming the soft tissue injury (whiplash) claims process’ this week, the MoJ confirmed there would be no change to the recoverability of disbursements since adding further restrictions at this time ‘would put undue burdens on unrepresented claimants’.

The MoJ response confirms it will not make changes to QOCS (qualified one-way costs shifting). Nor will it pursue the implementation of a Barème system, which combines fixed tables of damages with a ‘points-based’ scoring system to assess severity of claim.

It also ‘does not currently intend to pursue’ its proposals on early notification of claims and seeking treatment within a set period of time, although this will be kept under review.

Neil McKinley, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) said: ‘The proposals included consequences for injured people who wait to bring their claims or wait to seek medical help, even though there are often legitimate reasons for why they would delay.

‘Several proposals in this section of the consultation were in reaction to behaviours which are perceived to be indicative of fraud. They were disproportionate and unfair to claimants, the vast majority of whom are genuinely injured people.’

Qamar Anwar, managing director of First4Lawyers, said: ‘While this response has been a long time coming, we welcome the fact that the government has finally seen sense and decided against further reform.

‘The MoJ should focus on fixing a broken system before it attempts any more ill-advised changes and given past failures should commit to meaningful consultation with the industry before it does.’

The MoJ published its consultation in November 2016 but decided to split its proposed reforms into two parts. The first part, setting fixed tariffs for whiplash injury and banning offers to settle without a medical report, appeared in the Civil Liability Act 2018 and came into force in May 2021. The government’s work on the second part was postponed and subsequently interrupted by the pandemic.
Issue: 7972 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
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