PAYING_THE_COST. The one good thing about the virtual abolition of legal aid is that it has got rid of the anomalies which had grown up concerning...The one good thing about the virtual abolition of legal aid is that it has got rid of the anomalies which had grown up concerning the lack of costs awards against legally aided losers. This had affected the ability of genuine litigants to conduct proceedings in a fair manner against those who were legally aided. We all remember how clients were advised not to proceed or to submit as quickly as possible simply because the other side was legally aided. Surely we are now making precisely the same mistake when permitting the amount of costs payable by a loser to be dictated by the manner in which the winner decides to fund themselves. Why should a party have to consider withdrawing what they believe to be a valid claim or defence simply because of the threat of double costs because the other party has embarked on a conditional fee arrangement or taken out insurance? Once again, we have skewed the pursuit of justice by an artificial method of costs calculation. Can someone please explain to me why we have not got a simple system, whereby the winner obtains reimbursement of their proper costs calculated as the amount which a reasonable person would be prepared to expend on pursuing or defending a claim of the relevant value. Richard Engel, Max Engel & Co Solicitors, Northampton