Report comment

There were probably a large number of claimants moved from LA to CFA funding in the run up to 1 April 2013. In these particular cases the fact that liability (if not causation) was admitted before the swap appears to have been a telling factor when the CA considered the reasonableness of additional liabilities claimed as a result the change in funding arrangement.

It also appears that IM's evidence as to the potential consequences of LA funding not being available post LASPO were clumsily expressed which appears to have given a free helping hand to the paying parties.

Whether the outcome will be the same in cases which were rather more distant from settlement is yet to be seen, but more challenges will surely follow.

Any claimant solicitor who recommended switching out of LA funding, but failed to advise their clients about the post LASPO 10% enhancement, should now be nervous. Not only may they be deprived of the success fee (and ATE premium) but they may also face professional negligence claims from clients who might understandably feel short-changed.