header-logo header-logo

One direction

18 October 2016 / Kerry Underwood
Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs , Budgeting
printer mail-detail

Kerry Underwood examines qualified one-way costs shifting

  • Qualified one-way costs shifting only applies to personal injury work.
  • Under QOCS a losing personal injury claimant does not have to pay costs, but a winning claimant recovers costs as usual from the defendant, hence the “one way”.

Qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS) was introduced as part of the Jackson Reforms in April 2013 and the relevant rules are CPR 44.12 (set-off) and 44.13 to 44.17 (QOCS).

QOCS applies only to personal injury work, but it applies to all such work whatever its value and whatever type of work and thus for example a clinical negligence case of £2m is covered by QOCS.

Under QOCS a losing personal injury claimant does not have to pay costs, but a winning claimant recovers costs as usual from the defendant, hence the “one way”.

Rationale

The rationale was that such a scheme would make after-the-event (ATE) insurance unnecessary. The collective benefit to defendants—generally insurance companies in such cases in reality—is

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: Ben Daniels, DAC Beachcroft

NLJ Career Profile: Ben Daniels, DAC Beachcroft

Ben Daniels, newly elected as the next senior partner of DAC Beachcroft, reflects on his leadership inspiration and considers an impish alternative career

Osbornes Law—Lee Henderson

Osbornes Law—Lee Henderson

Family team bolstered by latest partner hire

Freeths—Graeme Danby & John Jeffreys

Freeths—Graeme Danby & John Jeffreys

Firms strengthens national restructuring and insolvency practice with leadership appointments

NEWS
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
In NLJ this week, Ian Smith, emeritus professor at UEA, explores major developments in employment law from the Supreme Court and appellate courts
Writing in NLJ this week, Kamran Rehman and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper examine Operafund Eco-Invest SICAV plc v Spain, where the Commercial Court held that ICSID and Energy Charter Treaty awards cannot be assigned
Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School highlights a turbulent end to 2025 in the civil courts, from the looming appeal in Mazur to judicial frustration with ever-expanding bundles, in his final NLJ 'The insider' column of the year
back-to-top-scroll