header-logo header-logo

QOCS to apply to all PI claims

12 July 2012
Issue: 7522 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Justice minister reveals details of key Jackson reform plan

The “qualified one-way costs shifting” (QOCS) regime will apply to all personal injury claimants—regardless of their financial circumstances—the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has confirmed.

In a written statement to Parliament this week, MoJ minister Jonathan Djanogly confirmed there would be no financial means testing.

Under QOCS, claimants who lose their personal injury case no longer have to pay their opponent’s costs. It is being introduced by Pt 2 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, and is due to come into effect in April.

Djanogly says QOCS protection will be lost if the claim is found to be fraudulent on the balance of probabilities; the claimant has failed to beat a defendant’s “Pt 36” offer to settle; or the case has been struck out because there is no reasonable cause of action, or it is an abuse of the court’s process.

The principles set out in Pt 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules will override QOCS, but only up to the level of damages recovered by the claimant.

Djanogly says the MoJ is considering the possibility of disallowing QOCS protection for any parts of a claim pursued for the benefit of a third party in respect of goods, services or indemnity provided to the claimant by that third party as a consequence of the accident. The third party might typically be a credit hire provider or property damage insurer.

He says an additional sanction will need to be paid where judgment for the claimant is more advantageous than a defendant’s Pt 36 offer. This will be calculated as 10% of damages or 10% of costs, with a maximum sanction of £75,000. The sanction will be tapered where claims are valued at more than £500,000.

Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School says: “The statement fundamentally shifts from the original plan and is the better for it. The abandonment of tests of wealth and unreasonableness will avoid much potential satellite litigation.”

NLJ consultant editor David Greene, a partner at Edwin Coe, says: “The relationship between QOCS and Pt 36 has been a troubling one.

“The application of it adds to the uncertainty of the system and its qualifications for all parties but it is good to secure some certainty of the way forward. The problem with the proposals, however, is that they can bring about some odd results in which it is as good to lose as win. This really needs looking at.”

Issue: 7522 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll