Today, the Jackson review recommendations were published and I’d be a rich man if I had a penny for every ten cents put in on this subject. That’s a trans-atlantic metaphor, if ever there was one…
Forum of Insurance Lawyers: “If all of the proposals come into effect it will usher in a new era for civil litigation. The proposals to give claimants an economic interest in the bringing of claims is very welcome”
Association of Personal Injury Lawyers: “Under Sir Rupert’s proposals for one-way costs shifting, the claimant will either pay for an insurance premium out of his damages, or risk paying for expenses such as medical reports and court fees if he loses the claim. None of this is the case under the current system which works on the ‘polluter pays’ principle.
Nichola Evans, Browne Jacobson: “Lord Justice Jackson has recognised in recent years that in personal injury litigation claimants effectively litigate risk free with there being no costs consequences to them…”
The Lord Chief Justice: “The judiciary has been concerned for some time that the costs of civil litigation are disproportionate and excessive. Lord Justice Jackson’s fundamental review addresses these questions head on. I am extremely grateful to him for the enormous work and effort that he has brought to bear on this important, complex issue and for proposals which for the first time address the issue of costs as a comprehensive coherent whole.”
Alexandra Anderson, RPC “Whilst, under the proposals, insurers will no longer foot the bill for a successful claimant’s inflated costs, defendants (and their insurers) may be forced to settle unmeritorious claims, because they may not be able to recover costs from a claimant who brings an action that fails.”
Philippa Hayes, Halliwells: “General damages will rise slightly, but that increase will in no way match the cost of the success fee and ATE premium, to be taken out of the equation. Claimant solicitors would no longer be able to argue that their hourly rates are higher than those of the defendant insurers’ due to the necessary payment of referral fees.”