header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
22 March 2018 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 7786 / Categories: Opinion , Insurance surgery , Costs
printer mail-detail

Taking a wrong turn

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7786_regan

Dominic Regan reflects on the fall-out from changing funding from legal aid to a conditional fee agreement

It is remarkable for the Court of Appeal to deliver a judgment running to 21 pages a week after a two-day hearing. Yet that is what happened in Surrey v Barnet and Chase Farms Hospitals NHS Trust (2018) EWCA Civ 451. The muscular decision is of profound significance to the profession.

Crucial timing

In the three cases which were under appeal, each claimant had been funded by legal aid in pursuit of clinical negligence damages. Just before the Jackson reforms kicked in on 1 April 2013, they all changed horse and entered into a conditional fee agreement (CFA) reinforced by after the event (ATE) insurance.

By the time each legal aid certificate was discharged, the defendant was in principle the paying party, although in one action there was still an important issue about causation to resolve. The timing was crucial. Any such arrangement created after that

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
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll