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

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