Are Jackson reforms working?

We are now approaching the second anniversary of the Jackson reforms brought in back in April 2013, and one has to question whether they are working. Or have they caused unnecessary suffering for firms of solicitors and misrepresentation from the insurance companies in the first place?

Reports over Christmas suggest they have failed.

The whole premise of the changes was due to excessive legal fees being paid by insurers and by introducing the same, the premiums would be reduced. The government and Lord Justice Jackson agreed. The reforms were introduced, yet latest reports suggest premiums are to rise.

My own experience of the reforms is that access to the courts is significantly worse and that is due to the Law of Unintended Consequences. From my own experience very few multi-track cases proceeded to detailed assessment. There had to be a significant difference of opinion or point of law that required judicial input. As such, only circa 5% of multi-track cases troubled the court. I can understand why Lord Justice Jackson opined that the detailed assessment stage was too late for the court to properly intervene to control costs. However, as a result of the change of stance, every multi track case now troubles the court with Costs Case Management Conferences to deal with costs budgets. As a result, waiting time for hearings has increased considerably.

Another change was the introduction of provisional assessments. Don’t get me wrong as I am a fan of these and currently boast a 100% record on these along with successfully being awarded extras for beating my own Part 36 Offers. However, the attitude from some paying parties comments has left me staggered. I have routinely received terrible offers from paying parties and when asked for an explanation as to the reductions the response was that everyone knows judges get it wrong sometimes so take the money or take your chance. I took the chance with a well presented claim and won. Again as a result of this attitude, recourse to the Courts is taking longer. CPR 47.15 PD 14.4 states the court will use its best endeavour to assess the bill in 6 weeks.  In reality the court has not even got round to setting a date for the provisional assessment in 6 weeks. A recent application to the SCCO for a detailed assessment was made in August 2014 and is not being heard until June 2015.

Best advice? Instruct Costs Draftsmen who know there way around the rules and get the best out of the same.

Advertisements

Jackson fallout continues

Further spectacular fallouts continue to become obvious from the Jackson report.

Decisions eminating from Norwich County Court bring the viability of cases being conducted under Conditional Fee Agreements into question.

Simply click and register to follow the blog to obtain the latest commentary on LASPO and Jackson’s latest consequences giving rise to further satellite litigation and all those things Jackson LJ wanted to banish.

Countdown to J Day

Reports out today suggest that J Day, or Jackson Implementation Day, is to be 1 October 2012.

Matters to be decided are the appropriate level of fixed costs for fast track matters, not exclusively limited to Personal Injury, but to include Insolvency. The fixing of costs will eliminate the arguments over the costs of costs and so the court system will be breathe a sigh of relief. Well a temporary one. MPs are warning the Judiciary that there will be a significant increase in Litigants In Person. LIPs are set to invade family courts following the reductions in availability of legal aid. Judges will no doubt be screaming how they long for the return of detailed assessment hearings.