header-logo header-logo

05 November 2025
Issue: 8138 / Categories: Legal News , Costs , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Double review on whiplash and fixed costs

Two separate post-implementation reviews are being held into the extension of fixed recoverable costs for personal injury claims and the whiplash regime

However, the Law Society has warned the consultation period is too short.

This week, the Civil Procedure Rule Committee launched a consultation on the extension of fixed recoverable costs in October 2023 from low-value claims only to cover most intermediate and fast track claims. The consultation closes on 5 January.

Law Society vice president Brett Dixon said: ‘We are concerned that the deadline for responses is very short.

‘It coincides with the call for evidence for the whiplash review and includes the Christmas break. We hope this gives government enough time to gather enough responses.’

Last week, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) launched a post-implementation review of its whiplash policies, covering fixed tariffs, the Official Injury Claim portal, statutory definition of the injury, ban on settling cases without medical evidence and small claims limit. An MoJ call for evidence will close on 22 December, with the review due to be published in the spring.

Reforms to whiplash injury claims were introduced seven years ago by Part 1 of the Civil Liability Act 2018. Fixed tariffs were introduced where the injury or injuries lasted less than two years. Insurers and claimants were barred from settling claims before medical evidence had been produced. At the same time, the threshold for the small claims track was raised from £1,000 to £5,000 for road traffic accident claims, bringing many more cases within its remit.

Dixon said the portal got off to ‘a challenging start.

‘We remain concerned about the length of time it takes to resolve road traffic claims, particularly those involving whiplash injuries. With average settlement times now reported to be exceeding 600 days, there are serious questions about how cases are being managed within the portal.’

Issue: 8138 / Categories: Legal News , Costs , Personal injury
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll