I'm interested in…

  • Strategy & Procedure
  • Catastrophic Injury
  • Professional Indemnity
  • Motor
  • Fraud
  • Disease
  • Liability
  • Commercial Insurance
  • Costs
  • Local Authority
  • Scotland

Looking ahead

February 2017

February was shaping up to provide an opportunity to regroup and reflect following a hectic two months of consultation responses and surprise discount rate developments. But on 30 January litigators were plunged straight back in with the Department of Health's consultation on Fixed Recoverable Costs in Clinical Negligence Claims. 

On 23 February, and earlier than expected, the Government responded to its consultation setting out proposals for reform to the whiplash claims handling process and the small claims track limit in personal injury claims. The consultation response was accompanied by a draft Prisons and Courts Bill presented to the House of Commons on the same day. This has been seen as quite a feat coming 34 days after the consultation closed and with 625 consultation responses to review.

And after expecting a decision on the discount rate "in February", there are now only three days left for the decision to be announced. On Friday morning The Times (subscription required) suggested that the announcement may arrive on Monday.

Further details can be found below along with developments on:

• Appeals and judgments to watch out for
• Jackson LJ's review of fixed costs
• Vehicle Technology and Aviation Bill on insurance for automated vehicles

Forthcoming cases

Supreme Court

Insurance: professional indemnity. Permission to appeal was granted in AIG Europe v Woodman & Anor (aka AIG v OC320301 LLP) last July and an expedited hearing took place on 10 October. The issue is the true construction of the words "in a series of related matters or transactions" within the aggregation clause of a professional indemnity insurance policy. Read more in our article on last April’s Court of Appeal decision.

Professional negligence: accountants. The issue in Swynson Ltd v Lowick Rose is whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that a lender could recover damages from its negligent adviser representing loans that had been repaid by the borrower, on the basis that the borrower's repayments were collateral to the adviser's breach of contract. A hearing took place between 21 and 24 November. Read more in our article on last year’s Court of Appeal decision.

Inheritance Act disputes: wills. The Court of Appeal in Ilott v Mitson considered the rules on reasonable provisions in wills for adult children. In this instance an estranged daughter claimed that her mother’s will, which left the majority of her estate to three charities, failed to make reasonable financial provision for her. The hearing of the charities’ appeal took place on 12 December. Read more in our article on last year’s Court of Appeal decision commenting on the implications for will drafting.

Professional negligence: solicitors. The case of BPE Solicitors v Hughes-Holland (aka Gabriel v Little) considers the scope of solicitors’ duties where losses relate to commercial risks. The appeal was heard on 14 & 15 December.

Non-delegable duties: foster carers. The case of NA v Nottinghamshire County Council concerning the abuse of a child by foster parents and the duties owed by local authorities in those circumstances took place on 8 & 9 February 2017.

Personal injury: cross border claims. The appeal in Mapfre Mutualidad Compania De Seguros Y Reaseguros SA & Anor v Keefe on whether a Spanish insured can be joined into the English proceedings already brought against the Spanish insurer, has been listed for 7 March 2017.

Police: human rights. In Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v DSD & Anor, concerning the "black cab rapist" John Worboys, the Court of Appeal upheld a first instance decision that the failure of the Met Police to carry out effective investigations into the victims' complaints amounted to inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 of the ECHR. The Met Police are appealing and the hearing will take place on 14 March 2017.

Supreme Court cases awaiting developments. We await further official details for a number of cases where permission to appeal has been granted:

  • Brownlie v Four Seasons Holidays Inc involving jurisdiction issues arising out of a fatal accident claim.

  • Gavin Edmondson v Haven Insurance which concerns an insurer engaging directly with claimants to conclude their claims which had been commenced in the Portal.

  • Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police which concerns the issue of liability of the police in negligence following an incident in which the claimant was injured when she became caught up in the arrest of a drug dealer. 

  • Steel v NRAM PLC is a Scottish solicitors’ negligence case concerning negligent misstatements and the existence of a duty of care in a relation to a security transaction.

  • New – Banca Nazionale del Lavoro SPA v Playboy Club London Ltd & Ors concerns a financial reference given by a bank to an agent acting for a club which ran a casino and whether a duty of care was owed to the club.

  • New – Barton v Wright Hassall involved the question of whether service of a claim form, falling short of compliance but coming to the attention of the defendant, could be validated.

  • New –Tiuta International Ltd v De Villiers Surveyors Ltd is a surveyors' negligence case concerning the extent of a lender's loss attributable to the second of two valuations of a property.

  • New –Dryden & Ors v Johnson Matthey PLC concerns exposure during employment to platinum salts and the issues of actionable injury and pure economic loss. The hearing will take place on 27 & 28 November 2017. Read more in this 12KBW article.

Court of Appeal

Update – Professional negligence: solicitors. At first instance in Williams v HCB Solicitors the defendant obtained summary judgment against a claimant who claimed to have lost a business opportunity as a result of their solicitors’ negligence.  An appeal was heard on 17 January 2017and in a judgment handed down on 1 February the Court of Appeal set aside the summary judgment and has allowed the claim to go to trial.

Update - Pre-action disclosure: fixed costs. On 1 February 2017 the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in Sharp v Leeds City Council and upheld HHJ Saffman's finding that fixed costs applied in a PAD application. Read more in our update.

New – Insurance: road traffic accidents. Lawtel has reported that the case of Cameron v Hussain & Anor was heard in the Court of Appeal in December. It involves issues of motor insurance and an unidentified driver. Judgment is awaited.

Credit hire: rates evidence. On 21 February 2017, the Court of Appeal heard appeals in two important credit hire cases in respect of rates evidence and the approach a court should take in the event that the rates evidence does not reflect the claimant’s case. Clayton v EUI Ltd and McBride v UK Insurance Ltd. 

Update - Portal claims: £400 club. In April 2016 there were press reports of a decision in the Cardiff County Court in which the judge ordered reimbursement of pre 2013 stage 1 costs paid by insurers after an admission of liability, but following which the cases did not proceed to stage 2. The judge granted a leapfrog appeal in Iqbal & Anor v Leek & Anor which was due to be heard on 23 February 2017 but we understand that the hearing has been vacated to be heard at a later date. In the meantime, it was reported earlier this month that the Court of Appeal has invited the Law Society to intervene in the case.  

Professional negligence: gratuitous services. In Burgess v Lejonvarn a professional consultant who advised friends on a significant landscape gardening project was held to owe them a duty of care. The defendant's appeal will take place on 8/9 March 2017

QOCS: claims against the MIB. In Howe v MIB it was held that a claimant who brought a claim against the MIB arising out of an RTA in France did not have QOCS protection. There are appeals both on this issue and the substantive claim. They are currently being dealt with separately with one due to be heard by 13 March 2017 and the other by 11 April 2017.

Local authority liability: swimming pool accident. In RXDX v Northampton Borough Council & Anr a six year old claimant suffered a brain injury after nearly drowning in a public swimming pool. The local authority was held liable for the failure of the lifeguards on duty to adequately supervise the claimant’s use of the pool. The Court of Appeal hearing will take place on 14/15 June 2017. Read more in Lord Justice Jackson’s judgment granting permission to appeal.

Lung cancer: contributory negligence. Permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal has been granted in the case of Blackmore v Department for Communities & Local Government. The 2014 county court decision involved calculating the degree of contributory negligence in a case where the deceased developed lung cancer due to a combination of smoking and exposure to asbestos. The appeal will take place on 14/15 June 2017. Read more in our update on the first instance decision.

Costs: assignment of CFA. The case of  Budana v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust on the validity of assigning a CFA was leapfrogged to the Court of Appeal and will be heard on 4/5 July 2017.

Costs: proportionality. An appeal from the decision of Senior Costs Judge Master Gordon-Saker about the ‘new’ test on proportionality has been leapfrogged to the Court of Appeal. BNM v MGN Ltd has now been listed for 10/11 October 2017.

High Court

Update 24 Feb - Costs budgeting: detailed assessment. An appeal in the case of Merrix v Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, on the application of SARPD, took place before Mrs Justice Carr on 16 February 2017. Dominic Regan is reporting on Twitter this morning that judgment has been handed down and "it says allow costs as budgeted save where there is good reason to vary." (Judgment now available on Bailii)

New – MIB agreements: judicial review. The judicial review by road victims' charity RoadPeace in relation to the MIB agreements was heard earlier this month. Judgment is awaited in R (on the application of RoadPeace) v Secretary of State for Transport & the MIB. 

Consultations

Update – Autumn Statement 2015: small claims track & low value whiplash claims. On 23 February the Government responded to its consultation on Reforming the soft tissue injury (whiplash) claims process announcing reforms to the whiplash claims process alongside significant prison reform, both of which are to be incorporated into a new Prison and Courts Bill. The headline measures include:

• the introduction of a tariff of fixed compensation for pain, suffering and loss of amenity for claims with an injury duration of between 0 and 24 months;
• further work to be done on the definition but the tariff will cover RTA related whiplash claims and minor psychological injuries.
• introducing a ban on both the offering and requesting of offers to settle claims without medical evidence;
• increasing the small claims limit for RTA related personal injury claims to £5,000 (this provision appears to relate to all types of RTA injury rather than just whiplash; 
• increasing the small claims limit for all other types of personal injury claim to £2,000.
• an implementation date of 1 October 2018.

A second part to the consultation response will follow in due course and will look at the outstanding proposals considered, including: the Insurance Fraud Taskforce recommendations, credit hire and rehabilitation. Read more in our update.

Motor insurance: implications of ECJ Vnuk ruling for UK legislation. In December the Department for Transport published its consultation Motor Insurance: consideration of the 'Vnuk judgment' to look at “options for amending domestic motor insurance law in light of the European Court of Justice ruling…” The Government is considering two options: one would result in UK law reflecting the decision in Vnuk and broadening the scope of insurance requirements; the other would be based on the (seemingly) preferred suggestion set out earlier this year in the European Commission Roadmap which would involve amending the Motor Insurance Directive, albeit acknowledging that the Commission has not actually finalised any decisions yet on this. The consultation closes on 31 March 2017. Read more in our brief summary of the consultation

Update - Fixed recoverable costs for clinical negligence claims. The consultation on fixed recoverable costs in clinical negligence claims was published on 30 January. It seeks views on proposals to introduce a mandatory system of fixed costs for claims valued between £1,000 and £25,000. To ensure that patients maintain access to justice, the proposals also aim to streamline the system and incentivise earlier resolution of claims. The consultation closes on 1 May 2017. Read more in the Department of health press release and in Simon Denyer's recent update

CMA legal services study. In January the Competition and Markets Authority launched a market study to “examine long-standing concerns about the affordability of legal services and standards of service.” An interim report was published in July and the final report followed in December. The CMA found that competition in legal services for individual consumers and small businesses is not working well, and made recommendations in order to address the issues that it has identified. The package of measures will be overseen by the Legal Services Board and the CMA will evaluate progress in three years' time. Last month the SRA confirmed to the Westminster Legal Policy Forum that it is preparing rules on publishing price information for consultation in the summer. Read more in the CMA press release (which links to the report) and also in our recent update

The following consultations are awaiting official responses:

Update - Discount rate consultations. On 7 December the Lord Chancellor made a surprise announcement that she was “undertaking to review the discount rate for personal injury damages awards, and to announce the result of the review by 31 January 2017.”  We considered the implications of the review in our December update. Soon afterwards the ABI launched a judicial challenge of the decision, calling upon the Government to complete its consultation on the methodology of setting the discount rate before proceeding. The challenge was unsuccessful and permission to appeal was refused. This was followed by a further statement from the Lord Chancellor postponing the decision until sometime "in February". Whilst we await the decision, a number of articles have started to consider the potential impact of any change. The Gazette has summarised some of the analysis and the ABI's James Dalton has commented in City A.M. 

Update - Review of Fixed Recoverable Costs. The deadline for written submissions to Lord Justice Jackson's Review of Fixed Recoverable Costs passed on 30 January. The terms of reference are to “develop proposals for extending the present civil fixed recoverable costs regime in England and Wales…” and to “consider the types and areas of litigation in which such costs should be extended, and the value of claims to which such a regime should apply”. The review will inform a Government consultation on proposed reforms after consideration of its recommendations.  This month Jackson LJ embarked on a series of seminars organised to gain input from court users on his review. DWF's Nigel Teasdale appeared on behalf of FOIL at the Manchester meeting this month. Read more about the discussions at that meeting in this New Law Journal article.

Update - Motor prosecutions: review of driving offences and penalties. Having first been announced in August 2013, the long awaited consultation was published on 5 December the day after a press release announcing that “dangerous drivers who kill are set to face life sentences”. The consultation seeks views on road traffic legislation relating to offences of causing death or serious injury. In particular, views are sought in relation to: the distinction between "careless" and "dangerous" driving; a perceived "gap in the law" for causing serious injury by careless driving; maximum penalties for causing death; driving disqualifications. The consultation closed on 1 February 2017 and the next day the MoJ announced that the response has been one of the highest for an MoJ consultation.

Claims Management Regulation: fees cap. In February the MoJ published a consultation on proposals to cap the level of fees that regulated CMCs can charge consumers. It is currently only proposed that the cap should apply to the financial products and services claims sector. However, the consultation did invite views on whether fee controls in the personal injury sector should be considered as well. The consultation closed on 11 April 2016.

Legal services regulation: removing barriers to competition. In July 2016 the MoJ announced a consultation (promised in November 2015) on proposals to reduce barriers to market entry, and regulatory burdens on Alternative Business Structures in legal services. Lord Faulks’ ministerial statement also mentioned the Government’s intention to consult on regulatory independence, in the context of the interim findings of the CMA’s Legal Services Market Study. On that issue, the CMA had identified benefits and risks within the current regulatory framework and whilst it was open to more fundamental change of the regime it acknowledged the complexity of the issues. The current consultation closed on 3 August.

Update - Driverless technology: DfT consultation. Last month we reported on the Government's response to its consultation along with a study showing that driverless cars could significantly reduce delays. On 22 February the Government published its Vehicle Technology and Aviation Bill which introduces self-driving car insurance measures. The Bill reflects the amendment to the initial proposal so that it "will now extend compulsory motor vehicle insurance creating a single insurer model to protect victims where the AV causes a crash in automated mode. The victim will have a direct right against the motor insurer and the insurer in turn will have a right of recovery against the responsible party to the extent there is a liability under existing laws, including under product liability laws."  Read more in the Department for Transport press release and this BBC article.

Driverless technology: House of Lords inquiry. Soon after the DfT consultation closed, the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee launched an inquiry into the future uses of driverless vehicles in the UK. That call for evidence closed on 26 October and the Committee’s questions included whether further revisions are needed to insurance, regulation and legislation in the UK to create an enabling environment for autonomous vehicles. The Committee took oral evidence in November and is preparing its report. 

Update - Solvency II: Treasury Select Committee Inquiry. On 13 September the Treasury Committee launched an inquiry into the new regime for the regulation of insurance, which was implemented in January 2016. There were fears that the much delayed EU directive would impose substantial costs on the insurance industry, and the Committee has already heard evidence suggesting that Brexit provides the opportunity to leave the Solvency II arrangement, and that doing so would help insurance companies. The inquiry is exploring the impact of the directive, and the options now available to the UK, in more detail. The Committee is currently taking oral evidence.  A panel of insurers participated in a session in January and on 22 February it was the turn of the PRA. Sam Woods is reported as saying that insurers were "putting their case too strongly" but acknowledging that "there are some bugs that need to be ironed out". Also this month, in a speech to the ABI, the Bank of England's David Rule expressed cautious optimism about the operation of the rules one year in.

Legislation

New – Whiplash reform: Prisons and Courts Bill. This Bill which was introduced to the House of Commons on 23 February contains the whiplash related provisions revealed in the response to the consultation on Reforming the soft tissue injury (whiplash) claims process, discussed further above. The increase to the Small Claims Track will be brought in by secondary legislation. The whiplash provisions are contained in Part 5 of the Bill and a Whiplash fact sheet (pdf) has also been published. Progress of the Bill can be followed here

New – Driverless technology: Vehicle Technology and Aviation Bill. This Bill, which sets out the proposed insurance measures required for automated vehicles following the recent DFT consultation was introduced to the House of Commons and given its First Reading on 22 February. Part 1 of the Bill contains the insurance provisions, the crux of which is that the driver and their autonomous car will be covered under the same policy as the notes to the Bill explain: "This Part extends compulsory motor vehicle insurance to cover the use of automated vehicles in automated mode, so that victims (including the ‘driver’) of an accident caused by a fault in the automated vehicle itself will be covered by compulsory insurance in place on the vehicle. The insurer would be initially liable to pay compensation to the innocent victim, including to the innocent driver who had handed control to the vehicle. The insurer then has the right to recover costs from the liable party under existing common and product law."  You can follow the Bill's progress here.

Insurance contract law reform: draft Insurable Interest Bill. In April the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission published a draft Bill following their review of the issue of Insurable Interest, having previously made proposals for reform in 2008 and 2011. They were asked to return to the issue due to the increased numbers of requests to write policies which include cover for children, cohabitants and to insure ‘key employees’ for substantial amounts. The draft Bill is intended to reflect the proposals set out in the issues paper and the Law Commissions invited comments on the draft Bill by 20 May 2016 with a view to publishing a final draft Bill and report in autumn 2016 but there have been no further developments to date.  

Enterprise Act 2016: late payment of insurance claims. The Act which includes provisions giving policyholders a right to damages for late payment of claims received Royal Assent on 4 May. The late payment provisions will come into force on 4 May 2017. Read more in our update from last year

Also on the horizon...

Update - Insurance Fraud Taskforce. Having published its final report at the beginning of 2016, the Taskforce met in November to look at what progress had been made to implement their 26 recommendations and the further work required to complete the task. Having accepted the Taskforce’s recommendations back in May, the Government in its “Reforming the Soft Tissue Injury (Whiplash) Claims Process” consultation is now seeking to implement the reforms announced in last year’s Autumn Statement (as recommended by the Taskforce), together with the recommended use of predictable damages in whiplash claims and mandatory notification of referral sources. This includes a recommendation from the Taskforce’s Personal Injury Working Party to amend the QOCS rules where a claimant discontinues less than 28 days before the start of a trial. Update: As noted above, the consultation response published on 23 February is the first part of the Government’s response to the recent consultation. Part two will be published in due course and will cover the ‘implementing recommendations from the Insurance Fraud Taskforce’

Update - MedCo. Following the MoJ’s announcement last October of the revised Qualifying Criteria for MROs, effective from 8 November, MedCo suspended 134 shell companies for failing to comply with the new Qualifying Criteria. This change, together with the change to the search criteria announced earlier in the year were introduced to tackle the gaming of the MedCo system. Read more about the changes in Nigel Teasdale’s update. This month MedCo has issued a reminder to MROs and DMEs of their obligations to upload case data and that failure to comply may result in enforcement action. Read more on the MedCo website and in the Gazette.

Claims Management Regulation. Carol Brady published the final report following her independent review of claims management regulation in March 2016. The review had been commissioned by the Treasury and the MoJ to examine the perception of widespread misconduct among CMCs and make recommendations to improve the regulatory regime.  It was then announced in the budget statement, also in March that responsibility for regulating CMCs would be transferred from the MoJ to the FCA. Since then, work has been ongoing at the FCA to develop proposals for how the regulation will operate but it is still not yet known when the primary legislation required to transfer regulation to the FCA will be ready. In the meantime there was news in December that from 30 December ownership of the Telephone Preference Service would be transferred from Ofcom to the Information Commissioners Office. Following that announcement MASS, APIL and The Law society took the opportunity to repeat their calls for a complete ban on cold calling for personal injury claims.

Mesothelioma claims: LASPO funding provisions. In late 2014 following a Justice Select Committee inquiry, the Government decided not to end the exemption from the application of LASPO provisions on recoverability to mesothelioma claims. They said a further review of the likely effects of the funding reforms on mesothelioma claims would be carried out in due course and this will now form part of the Post Implementation Review of LASPO. A Commons Briefing Note on mesothelioma claims last year speculated this would happen over 2017/2018. On 17 January, Justice Minister Sir Oliver Heald QC attended an All-Party Parliamentary Group meeting on Legal Aid and announced that a post-legislative memorandum on LASPO would be sent to the Justice Select Committee before May ahead of a full post-implementation review of the Act to be conducted by April 2018. Whilst the focus of this meeting was on Legal Aid, we presume that the full review will include a review of the mesothelioma provisions.

Mesothelioma Payment Scheme. At the end of November the DWP published the 2015/16 annual review of the Diffuse Mesothelioma Payment Scheme. The scheme is being seen as a success with 240 applicants in 2015/16 receiving an average payment of £135,000 amounting to a total of £36.5 million paid to applicants from the levy on EL insurers. On 18 January the 2016/17 levy was announced. It is £40.4m which includes £5.2m to accommodate a shortfall last year. This seems to reflect the comment in the annual review that setting the levy remains a challenge - last year the levy was reduced to reflect an overpayment the year before. By way of a comparison the levy in 2014/15 was £32m representing 2.2% of EL GWP and in 2015/16 was £31m representing 2%, although the reduced levy of £23.2m represented 1.5%. 

NIHL claims: Government action. In June 2015 the ABI published its report Tackling the Compensation Culture: Noise Induced Hearing Loss, improving the claims system for everyone which highlighted concerns about the increasing numbers and cost of NIHL claims. In late July the MoJ announced that in response to those concerns it had asked the Civil Justice Council to consider the issue and make recommendations. They are to consider how a fixed costs regime for NIHL cases might work and how the handling of these claims might be improved. The group was aiming to prepare an initial report by November 2015 with a final report by April 2016 but as the year went on hopes of seeing it before the end of the year dwindled. There is still no official news on the report and we also do not yet know how the work being done in this area will fit with the current consultation on increasing the small claims track limit and LJ Jackson’s review of fixed costs.

Civil Courts Structure Review: LJ Briggs' Final Report. On 27 July, Lord Justice Briggs published his final report following his review of the structure of the civil courts. There was no change from the headline recommendation of the interim report, namely the introduction of an online court capable of handling claims with a value up to £25,000, although Briggs LJ does mention that "the £10,000 threshold for the small claims track... may offer a worthwhile stepping stone" for a soft launch. A detailed summary can be found in the press release accompanying the report and you can read more in Simon Denyer’s analysis. The report also had an oblique reference in the "Transforming our Justice System" joint statement in the sense that the MoJ intends to automate and digitise “the entire process of civil money claims by 2020”. This month a Joint Statement was released by the Lord Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls confirming that the senior judiciary endorses the final report of the Civil Courts Structure Review, and supports the recommendations made by Briggs LJ. 

SRA: thematic review of personal injury sector. In February the SRA announced that it was starting a review to better understand the personal injury market and in August it began approaching a number of firms to participate in its survey. In October the SRA published its research. According to the survey, conducted by ICF Consulting, the perception is that the market seems to be generally working well although there are concerns that require further investigation. These include the quality of medical reports and a lack of knowledge within firms which have moved into areas such as clinical negligence and disease. Read more in Simon Denyer’s update. Work is ongoing to determine the prevalence of the issues highlighted and the SRA is visiting Personal Injury firms to understand how they have adapted following LASPO. The SRA expects to report further this year.

Update - Motor Insurers' Bureau: new Untraced Drivers' agreement. After consulting in 2013 and publishing a new Uninsured Drivers' Agreement in 2015, the DfT has announced that a new Untraced Drivers’ Agreement has now been agreed and will come into effect on 1 March 2017.  A Supplementary Agreement for the Uninsured Drivers’ Agreement has also been agreed and will enter force on the same day. The MIB press release says [the] “MIB paying a claim for the damage to an uninsured driver’s car when it has been caused by another uninsured or a ‘hit and run’ driver seems counter-intuitive. However, from 1 March 2017 that is what MIB will be required to do.” The agreements are available from the Motor Insurers’ Bureau and see also the Consultation homepage. Note that the Secretary of State for Transport, Chris Grayling, has stated that the rules will be repealed following Brexit. In the meantime, the outcome of the long running judicial review brought by RoadPeace in relation to the agreements is awaited. 

In the long grass?

Issues where there has been no activity for some time:

QOCS: Civil Justice Council report. In 2014 a new CJC working group was set up to advise on issues arising from the implementation of the Jackson reforms. Part of their remit, was to investigate and report on arguments for and against extending QOCS to other categories of case characterised by an asymmetric relationship between the parties such as actions against the police and solicitors’ professional negligence in injury claims. The report (pdf) was published on 30 June and concluded there is a strong case for extending the principle to police claims. For solicitors’ negligence claims, whilst there may be a case in principle for extending QOCS here, there does not appear to be a similar push for its application. In both cases, they say that any decision to extend QOCS would be a matter of policy for the Ministry of Justice.

Damages Based Agreements: Civil Justice Council (CJC). The Government's response to the CJC review of DBAs is still awaited. In September 2015 the CJC made a number of recommendations but the main issue of interest going into the review was the government’s decision not to permit hybrid DBAs, and in particular concurrent hybrid DBAs. The Working Group was divided on whether these should be allowed but it concluded that “it was a policy decision which was ultimately one for the Government". Read more in the CJC media release

Contact

For further information please contact Alex Fusco, Professional Support Lawyer on 0161 603 5211.

By Alex Fusco

This information is intended as a general discussion surrounding the topics covered and is for guidance purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. DWF is not responsible for any activity undertaken based on this information.

Top