header-logo header-logo

15 January 2010
Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs , Fees , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Jackson reveals agenda for change

Plans to introduce a tough stance on "no win no fee"likely to spark opposition.

Contingency fees will be allowed and conditional fee agreements will remain but success fees and after-the-event (ATE) insurance premiums will be irrecoverable, is the verdict of the final Jackson Report.

Lord Justice Jackson published his eagerly-awaited 585-page Final Report into civil litigation costs this week, revealing a sweeping agenda of change to bring costs under control and make civil justice more accessible.

His recommendations include the introduction of US-style contingency fees, under which the lawyer is paid a percentage of the winnings or nothing at all.

Controversially, he recommends that success fees and ATE premiums be irrecoverable in conditional fee agreements, "no win, no fee" agreements—a move which will irk personal injury lawyers.

Trade unions, the Association of Personal injury Lawyers, and personal injury barristers and solicitors’ firms all expressed support for recoverable premiums in the run up to the Final Report, and may now mount a fierce campaign against their removal.

Jackson LJ argues, in chapter 4 of the Report, “The regime of ATE insurance with recoverable premiums is... an extremely expensive form of one way costs shifting."

“Even if one disregards that portion of the premium which is referable to own disbursements, the present ATE insurance regime is substantially more expensive for defendants than one way costs shifting."

Recommending his own version of one way costs shifting he observed: "It would be substantially cheaper for defendants to bear their own costs in every case, whether won or lost, than to pay out ATE insurance premiums in those cases which they lose."

To make up for the loss of recoverable success fees and ATE premiums, Jackson LJ recommends increasing general damages awards for civil wrongs by 10%.

Referral fees—fees paid to organisations that "sell" damages claims to lawyers—add nothing of value to the process and should be scrapped, he said. Fixed costs should be introduced for fast-track civil cases (those worth a value of £25,000 or less) to ensure certainty of legal costs.

"Before-the-event" (BTE) insurance should be promoted so that the general public are encouraged to take out legal expenses insurance, for example, as part of their household insurance. A Costs Council should be established to annually review fixed costs and hourly lawyer rates to make sure they are fair.

Jackson LJ said he believes his recommendations will reduce the costs burden on the NHS, which currently more than £140m per year, and reduce the costs of defending libel actions.

The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, said:  “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.”

The Master of the Rolls, Lord Neuberger, said: “The time for discussion and debate is over: it is now time for action. I hope that the Ministry of Justice will give these proposals the same enthusiastic and practical support which the Judges will give them.”
 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
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
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll