header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
27 April 2012 / David Greene
Issue: 7511 / Categories: Opinion , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

The missing links

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

David Greene explores the gaps in the LASPO Bill

The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill is awaiting Royal Assent and we can now see the shape of the forthcoming Act.

Omissions

The Bill does not contain any provisions for two structural parts of the Jackson reforms—the 10% increase in general damages and qualified one-way cost shifting (QOCS). Amendments to do so failed. The increase in damages is to be the subject of extra statutory regulation and QOCS will be regulated by secondary legislation, but many are unclear as to exactly how these are to be affected and their final form.

Lord Justice Jackson recommended that awards of general damages for personal injury should be increased by 10%. This was to ensure that claimants are properly compensated and that damages are not substantially reduced as a result of his proposed reduction in recovery of costs.

There is, however, no provision in the Bill to this effect. Jackson LJ proposed the increase may be imposed in similar fashion to earlier increases

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
NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll