header-logo header-logo

29 September 2016 / Patrick Allen
Issue: 7716 / Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Costs , Jackson
printer mail-detail

A Nightmare on Claimant Street

Fixed costs are unfair and unjust to claimants, says Patrick Allen

Fixed costs for claims up to £250,000 will cause substantial disadvantage to individuals who bring claims and bring an undeserved windfall to insurers and corporate defendants.

The backers of fixed costs (including Lord Justice Jackson, the government and insurers) suggest that they will bring certainty to the system to make it proportionate and predictable.

But it is not so simple. Litigation is not a fair fight between equally resourced players but a war between two very unequal parties.

Statistics confirm that most claimants are individual citizens of modest means (the median gross earnings for all employees in 2014 was £22,044, pensioners, children and the disabled, who will also be claimants, earned much less) and the defendant is usually local or central government, the police, a large corporate body or an insured person. As a consequence, most defendants have the backing of considerable wealth and resources.

This is shown by the fact

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: 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