header-logo header-logo

24 February 2023 / David Bailey-Vella
Issue: 8014 / Categories: Features , Profession , Costs , Damages
printer mail-detail

Watching the QOCS

112056
Has the delicate balance put in place by Lord Justice Jackson toppled over? David Bailey-Vella reports on the new landscape for qualified one-way costs shifting
  • The landscape for qualified one-way costs shifting is changing after a raft of satellite litigation.
  • The biggest issue in recent years has been the ability of unsuccessful defendants to set off costs awarded to them against only the damages awarded to the claimant, with the courts indicating this is a matter for the Civil Procedure Rule Committee.
  • A new statutory instrument coming into effect in April appears to favour defendants, claimant lawyers argue.

When Lord Justice Jackson recommended the introduction of qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS), I wonder if he anticipated just how much satellite litigation it would cause, and for how long.

There has been a rash of such cases, especially since last autumn. These include, in no particular order of importance:

  • Achille v Lawn Tennis Association Services Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1407: the Court of Appeal held that dismissal of the personal injury
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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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