Report comment

Audi alteram partem! What do you have to say Thompsons? But, subject thereto Anon 12.27, if for you it's justifiable to charge £72,320 for a claim which was never worth more than £5,000, this clin. neg. world has become like Alice in Wonderland. And clearly the judge in this case agreed.1

However, you might well ask what i would do in its place. I have three suggestions:

1. Abolish the practice of charging by the 6 minute unit, or 1/10th of one's hourly rate. In its place have 0.6 minute units and 1/100th of hourly rate, or multiples thereof. It is a fraud to charge a 1 minute 'phone call as if it had lasted for 6;

2. Have agreements that defendants will not plead limitation if negotiations are carrying on unless and until they give 28 days' notice to the contrary. This would avoid the claim fees and other costs associated with issuing a 'protective' claim;

3. Each side should be required to make an open Pt 36 offer before issue;

4. Have boards to assess the value of claims and liability similar to CICB. This could all be done on paper evidence. Three board members each puts in his assessment and the average is the amount of the award, discounted if appropriate in case of any contributory negligence plus a liability award expressed in % terms so claimant gets something, whereas under the existing system he gets nothing if, by fair means or foul, NHS can escape a finding of liability.


I can already hear the howls of derision emanating from the clin. neg. practitioners who make their comfortable livings racking up costs in the way shown in this and other cases and who do not like having their boat rocked. But that's just tough. Carry on as we are going and there will very soon be no NHS to sue. The costs of dealing with claims will kill it off, not the awards.