header-logo header-logo

09 May 2013
Issue: 7559 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

At a loss over new PI rule

Proportionality rule is “boggling” says personal injury expert

There was such a “frenzy of activity” among lawyers before the 1 April cut-off date for the new civil litigation rules that one after-the-event (ATE) insurer sold £30m of policies in March alone.

Writing in this week’s NLJ, Patrick Allen, senior partner of Hodge, Jones and Allen, says the insurer’s normal annual turnover was £1m.

Allen, who sits as a deputy district judge and is a former president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, says civil litigation lawyers do not have the “faintest idea” how the new rule on proportionality will work because there is “no guidance”. He said satellite litigation was “inevitable”. “The concept that necessary and reasonable work done (required by the defendant or the court) may now be unrecoverable is still boggling. There will be retrospective effects caused by the transitional rule. For example what about success fees which are not supposed to be taken into account for proportionality under the old rule?”

Allen says the “losers” from the referral fee ban will be consumers who now have less choice, and those “smaller firms” which are no longer on panels, able to buy work from claims management companies or afford internet marketing.

Referring to the changes to the road traffic accident (RTA) portal, he warns that lawyers will have to run portal claims as “loss leaders” in future, even if there is a contribution to costs from damages.

Allen adds that he was concenerd that there would be no effective funding for conditional fee agreements outside personal injury work but says that after the event policies are starting to emerge to cover professional negligence, disrepair, actions against the police and general litigation. He predicts that it will be 12 months before personal injury lawyers will be in a position to judge whether they should “adapt and persevere or leave the market”.

Issue: 7559 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll