*/
The Bar Council has reacted with interest to Lord Justice Jackson’s provisional view on “no win no fee” agreements contained in his preliminary report in his Review of Civil Litigation Costs.
In the report, published on 8 May, Jackson LJ states: “following the retraction of legal aid, either conditional fee agreements (CFAs) or some other system of payment by results (contingent fee agreements, CLAF, SLAS, third party funding agreements etc) must exist in order to facilitate access to justice.” “The real issue … is how CFAs or alternative ‘no win – no fee’ arrangements should be structured, not whether they should exist,” he continues.
Welcoming the report, the Bar Chairman, Desmond Browne QC, said: “Public funding for civil cases is now unavailable in many areas. Very careful consideration therefore needs to be given to the means whereby meritorious litigants are assured of the access to justice which they deserve.”
Michael Todd QC, Chair of the Bar Council Jackson Working Group, said: “I note that Lord Justice Jackson has focused on questions relating to cost shifting, fixed costs, personal injury claims, controlling the costs of ‘heavy’ litigation, CFAs and ATE insurance, and alternative methods of funding access to civil justice. We are concerned that the ever-increasing costs burden of civil litigation results in a denial of access to justice for the many people who cannot afford those costs. That is clearly not in the public interest.”
In the report, published on 8 May, Jackson LJ states: “following the retraction of legal aid, either conditional fee agreements (CFAs) or some other system of payment by results (contingent fee agreements, CLAF, SLAS, third party funding agreements etc) must exist in order to facilitate access to justice.” “The real issue … is how CFAs or alternative ‘no win – no fee’ arrangements should be structured, not whether they should exist,” he continues.
Welcoming the report, the Bar Chairman, Desmond Browne QC, said: “Public funding for civil cases is now unavailable in many areas. Very careful consideration therefore needs to be given to the means whereby meritorious litigants are assured of the access to justice which they deserve.”
Michael Todd QC, Chair of the Bar Council Jackson Working Group, said: “I note that Lord Justice Jackson has focused on questions relating to cost shifting, fixed costs, personal injury claims, controlling the costs of ‘heavy’ litigation, CFAs and ATE insurance, and alternative methods of funding access to civil justice. We are concerned that the ever-increasing costs burden of civil litigation results in a denial of access to justice for the many people who cannot afford those costs. That is clearly not in the public interest.”
The Bar Council has reacted with interest to Lord Justice Jackson’s provisional view on “no win no fee” agreements contained in his preliminary report in his Review of Civil Litigation Costs.
Chair of the Bar reflects on 2025
AlphaBiolabs has donated £500 to The Christie Charity through its Giving Back initiative, helping to support cancer care, treatment and research across Greater Manchester, Cheshire and further afield
Q&A with criminal barrister Nick Murphy, who moved to New Park Court Chambers on the North Eastern Circuit in search of a better work-life balance
Revolt Cycling in Holborn, London’s first sustainable fitness studio, invites barristers to join the revolution – turning pedal power into clean energy
Rachel Davenport, Co-founder and Director at AlphaBiolabs, reflects on how the company’s Giving Back ethos continues to make a difference to communities across the UK
By Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
Are you ready for the new way to do tax returns? David Southern KC explains the biggest change since HMRC launched self-assessment more than 30 years ago... and its impact on the Bar
Professor Dominic Regan and Seán Jones KC present their best buys for this holiday season
Marking one year since a Bar disciplinary tribunal dismissed all charges against her, Dr Charlotte Proudman discusses the experience, her formative years and next steps. Interview by Anthony Inglese CB
Little has changed since Burns v Burns . Cohabiting couples deserve better than to be left on the blasted heath with the existing witch’s brew for another four decades, argues Christopher Stirling
Pointillism, radical politics and social conscience. Review by Stephen Cragg KC
