REUTERS | Carlos Barria
August 24, 2020

Arranging funding for small cases

Since the Jackson reforms were implemented in 2013, law firms handling disputes worth less than £1 million outside of personal injury have had much greater difficulty finding ways to fund their clients’ cases. The simple reason is that the cost of litigating modest value cases does not fall proportionately with the value of the claim. There is no magic wand that can be waved to fix this problem. Absent the recoverability of after the event (ATE) insurance premiums and conditional fee agreement (CFA) success fees, some cases simply cannot obtain access to justice with the costs regime as it is.

Continue reading →

REUTERS | GCS
August 20, 2020

COVID-19: security for costs in an economic downturn

The recent case of International Pipeline Products Ltd v IK UK Ltd and others is an early example of a party seeking to use the economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic to support a security for costs application. Given the predictions of a slow recovery and the prospect of litigating in financially uncertain times for some time to come, the case provides useful guidance on the extent to which these macro-economic issues are likely to be taken into account by the court when considering the costs of litigation and the ordering of security.

Continue reading →

REUTERS | Arnd Wiegmann
August 19, 2020

CPR 36.17(4): what is sauce for the claimant goose is not sauce for the defendant gander but CPR 36.17(5) can dilute its strength

Prior to the implementation of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) in 1999, what is now Part 36 did not exist. A defendant could make a payment into court to put a claimant on risk as to future costs. “Reject my offer and fail to beat it at trial, and you will be ordered to pay my costs from the last date on which the offer should have been accepted” was the only sanction. There was no procedure under the Rules of the Supreme Court (then in force) for claimant’s offers, still less any risk for defendants to face penalties if they unreasonably refused to accept them.

Continue reading →