New information may reassure practitioners concerned about Sir Rupert’s Jackson’s controversial proposals for fixed costs up to £250,000. Writing in this week’s NLJ, Professor Dominic Regan says he has received information and representations from sources, including members of the judiciary, which “cast a different light upon common perceptions”. Jackson LJ’s proposals have caused a considerable stir, with silks, counsel, small practices, defendant lawyers and City firms agreed that the proposed reform would lead to injustice.
As Prof Regan wrote last week, barristers are concerned that solicitors will be reluctant to use counsel. Defendant lawyers feel claimants will have more incentive to “try it on”. Claimant lawyers fear they will have no alternative but to deduct a hefty percentage of costs from the damages.
However, Professor Regan writes this week: “Those who took fright at the proposed scale of fixed costs need to appreciate that the figures cited were by way of example and certainly are not set in stone.
A root cause of disquiet was a perception that these figures had already been signed off as a fait accompli. Not so. “The £250,000 ceiling, which caused jaws to drop, was floated by Jackson as long ago as 2009. Memories fade! I think a complication here is the description of that amount as being in the foothills of multi-track work. That is true for London commercial practices but the bulk of firms in England and Wales routinely handle claims which fall well short of £250,000. Their anxiety is that virtually all of their work would be captured by a very different funding model.” (see: Perception matters)
