Q&As

Post-Jackson: What costs issues arise when acting in a personal injury claim for a child claimant?

read titleRead full title
Published on LexisPSL on 21/05/2014

The following PI & Clinical Negligence Q&A provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Post-Jackson: What costs issues arise when acting in a personal injury claim for a child claimant?
  • Update

Post-Jackson: What costs issues arise when acting in a personal injury claim for a child claimant?

The new protocols for RTA and EL/PL claims outline the additional fixed costs which can be recovered in respect of an infant approval hearing when acting for a child claimant. However, the protocols’ guidance doesn’t answer many other issues surrounding the funding of PI claims on behalf of children.

CPR 46.4 makes it clear that no money may be deducted from an award to a child or a protected party without the permission of the court. What is far less clear, is in what circumstance the court would give such permission? Can the issue be dealt with by summary assessment or, is it necessary to go to the expense of a detailed assessment?

Traditionally, the courts have been reluctant to order costs against a protected party. If this approach continues in the post-Jackson world, claimant solicitors will find themselves unable to take a proportion of the child’s damages as their success fee under a CFA.

This issue has arisen as a consequence of the implementation of sections 44(4) and 46(1) of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, which prevents the recovery of additional liabilities from defendants.

To date, there has been no higher court

Popular documents