header-logo header-logo

Jackson under attack

17 February 2011
Issue: 7453 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Jackson LJ’s plans for CFAs could have unlawful impact

Leading counsel’s opinion has warned that Lord Justice Jackson’s plans to restrict conditional fee arrangements (CFAs) could be unlawful because of their impact on victims of serious accidents.

The government’s consultation on civil costs, which closed this week, broadly accepted Jackson LJ’s recommendations that damages be increased by 10% and that claimants pay some of their legal fees out of their compensation.

According to counsel’s opinion obtained by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, however, these proposals could contravene Arts 6 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights because disabled people could be denied access to justice.

The opinion, written by Nigel Pleming QC and Colin Thomann of 39 Essex Street, warns that the government’s proposals “seem to us to place claimants who have suffered the most complex personal injury at a particular disadvantage as regards their prospects of securing adequate legal representation, financial protection from adverse costs consequences, and adequate compensation to permit a return to active daily life”.

It later adds: “It follows that there are real prospects of a Convention based challenge to the funding reform proposals.”

Lord Justice Jackson has criticised the government for not seeking to implement his proposals in full. The Ministry of Justice green paper proposes allowing recoverability of after-the-event insurance premiums where they relate to disbursements and allowing damages to be increased in CFA cases only. Jackson recommended abolishing recoverability and increasing damages generally.

In a letter to Ken Clarke, the justice secretary, last month, Jackson LJ said the amendments “would create perverse incentives and undermine the structure of the reforms”.

Christopher Hancock QC, chairman of the Commercial Bar Association, warned the proposals could lead to “acute” problems for litigants. “The combination of cuts to legal aid and plans which will impact severely on funding of smaller cases must not be allowed to exclude whole categories of parties from the ability to seek legal redress,” he said.

Issue: 7453 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll