header-logo header-logo

11 February 2010 / Tony Allen , Dr Karl Mackie
Issue: 7404 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

A missed opportunity?

Tony Allen & Dr Karl Mackie question why Jackson LJ has shied away from formally endorsing mediation

So what should the mediation world make of the monumental report by Sir Rupert Jackson, apart from marvelling at its clarity and timeliness? Clearly it has most to do with litigation funding, especially conditional fee agreements (CFAs), after the event (ATE) litigation insurance and recoverability of ATE premiums and success fees under CFAs from (usually) defendants.

His general solution is to wind the clock back to 1995-1999 and to require any success fees (capped at 25%) to be deducted from claimant damages rather than being recoverable from defendants, with ATE premiums similarly being payable (if taken out) by claimants but no longer recoverable from defendants in the event of a win. The price which he asks defendants to bear is a 10% increase in general damages in personal injury (PI) and clinical negligence cases, and “qualified” one way costs transfer.

This would mean that claimants will get standard or indemnity costs if they win,

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll