header-logo header-logo

21 May 2009
Issue: 7370 / Categories: Legal News , Damages , Costs , Employment
printer mail-detail

Straw to regulate CFAs

Costs

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is clamping down on “contingency fee agreements”, where “no win no fee” lawyers extract a large proportion of their client’s damages for excessive legal fees.

The damages-based arrangements are most common in employment tribunal proceedings and are largely unregulated. The MoJ intends to use the Coroners and Justice Bill, currently before Parliament, to introduce proper regulation to protect against unfair or unreasonable agreements.

The new regulations are likely to include: a cap on the percentage of damages that can be recovered by the legal representative; a requirement that legal representatives provide claimants with clear and transparent information on total costs; a requirement that legal representatives clarify the deductions made from the claimant’s award which are to go to the representative as their fee for taking on the case; and a requirement that they provide explicit information on alternative methods of funding.

The justice secretary, Jack Straw, says: “These arrangements—unlike, for example, conditional fee agreements—have been without statutory regulation because of an anomalous and long standing interpretation of the law which has classified proceedings in employment tribunals as ‘non-contentious’.”

The department is due to publish a consultation paper with more details.

(For more on costs see this issue pp 737–748.)

Issue: 7370 / Categories: Legal News , Damages , Costs , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll