header-logo header-logo

14 January 2026
Issue: 8145 / Categories: Legal News , Costs , Personal injury , Housing , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

Flaws found in fixed costs regime

The extension of fixed recoverable costs (FRC) from low-value personal injury to most civil cases worth up to £100,000 ‘is failing to deliver what it promised’, the Law Society has warned

FRCs were extended to most fast- and intermediate-track cases in 2023, implementing the recommendations of Lord Justice Jackson’s civil litigation costs review. The Ministry of Justice and the Civil Procedure Rules Committee have been taking stock of how well the extension is working, with a view to consulting in detail on the reforms later this year.

Responding this week, the Law Society said two years was too soon to know the full impact of the extension. However, it highlighted some areas of concern.

Brett Dixon, Law Society vice president, said: ‘The FRC regime is appearing to unfairly penalise the successful party, who could now be responsible for paying the difference between lawyers’ reasonable costs and the amount of FRCs, rather than this cost falling on the unsuccessful party. This disparity should be looked at as a priority.

‘We are also concerned that the FRC regime has the potential to negatively impact vulnerable parties. It is important that the regime properly protects the most vulnerable in our legal system and ensures everyone can access justice.’

Dixon urged ministers to continue to exclude housing legal aid cases from the FRC regime, and to do so on a permanent basis ‘given our concerns about how the regime is operating and the catastrophic impact FRCs could have on housing legal aid providers’.

While the Jackson review recommended FRCs for housing disrepair and possession claims, the government decided to exempt these cases until 2028. The reasons are the ongoing Renters’ Rights Act reforms, leasehold and freehold reforms and Awaab’s Law, which enhance protection for tenants.

Law Society research conducted with Frontier Economics and published last May, found all housing legal aid provision was loss-making, with fee earners recovering only half their costs. The research noted median providers in the sample were losing £33,000 for each full-time fee earner providing housing legal aid. The work was compensated at hourly rates of £46 to £72.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll