header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
11 February 2010 / Tony Allen , Dr Karl Mackie
Issue: 7404 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

A missed opportunity?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll