header-logo header-logo

04 October 2023
Issue: 8043 / Categories: Legal News , Costs
printer mail-detail

Satellite litigation warning as FRC regime begins

Lawyers have called for ‘urgent’ clarity on fixed recoverable costs (FRC), as the much-anticipated regime came into effect

The regime, in place from 1 October, applies to most civil claims valued up to £100,000, with exceptions such as clinical negligence claims below £25,000, mesothelioma claims, abuse cases, claims against the police involving an intentional or reckless tort, and relief or remedy in relation to the Human Rights Act. Housing cases are exempt for two years.

Judges will have discretion to exclude complex cases valued under £100,000.

Changes to Part 36 offers aimed at encouraging parties to settle at an earlier stage have also come into force.

However, Law Society President Lubna Shuja said: ‘There are too many unanswered questions around how the regime will work in practice.

‘The government’s intention with these reforms has been to provide certainty for litigation costs, but the lack of clarity emerging from the reforms will surely lead to years of satellite litigation. At the very least, the government needs to provide further guidance in support of the rules.

‘FRCs are not the same as fixed incurred costs. To set FRCs at levels that do not accurately reflect the broad spectrum of civil litigation, increases the risk of recoverable costs for some cases not being sufficient in relation to the actual costs incurred.’

Michael Young, legal director in professional negligence at Lime Solicitors, urged solicitors to make sure they give clear and prompt advice to clients on the changes to avoid becoming liable for professional negligence.

Young said: ‘It is vital to be ready, as failing to advise with the changes in mind could leave the profession facing a professional negligence time bomb.

‘If solicitors fail to advise their clients on these new changes, they could find themselves liable when claimants end up recovering less costs than they, entirely justifiably, believe they are entitled to.’

He also expressed concern the new regulations ‘would in theory reward a claimant for pushing through to court proceedings instead of exploring a pre-action settlement in greater depth.

‘This outcome would not serve the interests of either claimants or defendants’.

Issue: 8043 / Categories: Legal News , Costs
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