Report comment

1. Re Mr Balchin's comment I don't agree that having a no costs regime helps to promote settlement. Having a costs sword hanging over your head and not knowing how deep it will cut has always, and will always, be the most effective way of aiding settlement. Knowing the exact size of the sword or having no sword at all doesn't. It gives defendants the opportunity to budget and to keep playing their hand knowing precisely what it will cost them if they lose it. Just like the loss of success fee recoverability, the recoverability of insurance premiums and the hike in Court fees this system again favours the defendant. The party who if they lose has committed the civil wrong and cost you in time and expense to bring a claim!
2. Re the author, quite how there is not an outcry is beyond me. A collective sigh of relief does not mean there won't be a lot to challenge if a consultation comes out.
3. Jackson is wrong to think there would be grounds for primary legislation if all contracts have a costs indemnity clause. Nobody would ever allow a two-tier system to develop just to accommodate a grid of arbitrary figures based on flimsy evidence!