This site uses cookies.

News Category 3

Editorial: Costs Management - Aidan Ellis, Temple Garden Chambers

24/02/14. The (relatively) new costs budgeting provisions are producing some interesting results, aside from providing the background to the Court of Appeal decision in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers. One consequence of the reforms is that a Costs Management Conference is often required, particularly where the parties cannot agree their respective budgets. This creates an additional pressure on costs and court resources. First, experience suggests that these hearings are usually listed for between 60 and 90 minutes. This requires a...

Image ©iStockphoto.com/bluestocking

Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...

Fixed Costs - Shannon Eastwood, Atlantic Chambers

22/02/14. There are many types of fixed costs but this paper shall focus on: The fixed costs for RTA, EL, PL claims under the Portal; The escape provisions for cases that fall out of the Portal; The fixed costs applicable for those cases; and The contentious issues which are likely to arise. As part of the ‘Jackson reforms’, the following significant changes were made to the fixed costs regime:

    1. The maximum value of claims under the ‘Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents’ was increased from £10,000 up to £25,000 where the claim notification form was sent on or after 31st July 2013.

    2. Accidents involving employer’s liability (“EL”) or public liability (“PL”) on or after 31st July 2013 were brought within the Portal with their own ‘Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury (Employers’ Liability And Public Liability) Claims’.

    3. Fixed Costs were introduced for all Fast Track cases which...

Image ©iStockphoto.com/picha

Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...

Slam Ons/Induced Accidents - Andrew Mckie, Clerksroom

20/02/14. There are a number of potential warning signs of a staged/induced accident. A staged/induced accident may be broadly defined as a vehicle which slams on its brakes for no reason in order to induce an accident. A common scenario may be a vehicle which is setting off from a roundabout, and it braked for no reason as it enters the roundabout causing the vehicle behind to go into the back of it so the occupants of the vehicle braking can make claims for compensation. Another type of alleged fraud is a decoy vehicle type accident where two vehicles work in conjunction with each other and the vehicle in front brakes for no given reason and this may be at the exit to a junction from an A road or a turn into a side road, the vehicle behind it being driven by the vigilant person also brakes and causes the vehicle behind it i.e. the innocent motorist to go into the back of the middle vehicle and the vehicle which caused that vehicle to brake disappears never to be seen again.

One or more of the following factors may be indicative that the claim needs to be investigated as a slam on induced/contrived accident.

Very often, the criminal gangs engaged in this type of activity will target commercial vehicles i.e. white van men because they assume that such individuals will either not report the accident to their employer, or will not engage in the process of challenging the claims.

It is also a sad fact, that some fraudsters target elderly people or single mothers and other individuals in society who the fraudsters think may not necessarily challenge a claim. The difficulty for the fraudsters is that this type of fraud has become more prevalent and due to the publicity of these types of cases in the media, the general public have become more aware of groups of cases. This was highlighted in the case of Baljinder Gill who was killed when her car was hit by a van on the A40 in Buckinghamshire.

Some other common features of this type of fraud may be as follows...

Image ©iStockphoto.com/RobertCrum

Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)..., or click below to purchase the book.

On the Cusp of Change in Modern Dispute Resolution - Andrew Goodman, 1 Chancery Lane

10/02/14. Evaluative Mediation, Early Neutral Evaluation, Expert Determination, and Flexible Hybrids.  The market for ADR provision in p.i. claims is changing. The success of round tables and orthodox mediation is apparent, but there is still significant downward pressure on cost. Insurers and other bulk consumers of ADR services are looking at commoditising mediation, with a personal injury and professional indemnity scheme, panel lists of mediators, fixed or banded fees, and a requirement for training in mediation advocacy to add value to claims management.

This commoditisation opens up the prospect for greater use of other cost-efficient areas of dispute resolution the main stream potential for which has been overlooked or discarded, either because they do not suit conventional mediation training and practice, or because of inherent (but far from insuperable) procedural difficulties, or because of the lack of availability of formal professional training. I refer to evaluative mediation, early neutral evaluation and non-binding expert determination...

Image ©iStockphoto.com/onurdongel

Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...

Bad Business for Everyone - Bill Braithwaite QC, Head of Exchange Chambers

06/02/14. Sympathy and understanding are so important for a claimant lawyer, but I suspect that one result of all the changes which are currently taking place in the personal injury market is that practitioners will not have the time or the money to be sympathetic and understanding.

The more we have to turn catastrophic injury litigation into a business, the more we have to cut cost, the less we can spend on client care. I think it’s very sad, because I've spent my life working for solicitors who care for their clients, and I've enjoyed being part of that.

Hopefully, the tide will turn slightly, and we will still be able to afford to care!

Bill Braithwaite QC
Head of Exchange Chambers
This article was first published at http://billbraithwaite.com/blog/

Image ©iStockphoto.com/nspimages

All information on this site was believed to be correct by the relevant authors at the time of writing. All content is for information purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. No liability is accepted by either the publisher or the author(s) for any errors or omissions (whether negligent or not) that it may contain. 

The opinions expressed in the articles are the authors' own, not those of Law Brief Publishing Ltd, and are not necessarily commensurate with general legal or medico-legal expert consensus of opinion and/or literature. Any medical content is not exhaustive but at a level for the non-medical reader to understand. 

Professional advice should always be obtained before applying any information to particular circumstances.

Excerpts from judgments and statutes are Crown copyright. Any Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of OPSI and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland under the Open Government Licence.