This site uses cookies.

Low Cost Arbitration Instead of Expensive Civil Justice? - Matthew Chapman, 1 Chancery Lane

03/04/15. At a recent seminar a solicitor, with whom I was discussing the recent (rather extraordinary) hike in Court fees, mentioned an initiative which Andrew Ritchie QC has pioneered. Arising out of concerns about recent Government “reforms” to civil justice as these deal with personal injury litigation, the initiative is a proposal for personal injury and clinical negligence claims (presently dealt with in the civil justice system that we all know and love) to be dealt with instead by means of an alternative: a low cost and relatively swift arbitration scheme (using independent PI silks as arbitrators). In common with commercial arbitration, upon appointment, the PI Arbitrator will provide the parties with relatively early assessment of and decision upon those matters which they cannot agree between themselves. The scheme advertises itself as offering no Mitchell-strike outs and no Jackson-inspired costs rules (and, of course, with competitive entry fees). Defendants can still recover costs (albeit capped at 20% of damages). In essence, what is proposed is a private (privatised?) system of (informal) redress which will run parallel to (and, perhaps, eventually replace) the present civil justice system for PI claims.

The web page for the new arbitration system (advertised as launching next month) is at www.picarbs.co.uk.

Who knows, if the proposal takes off, the Royal Courts of Justice building on the Strand can become a full-time (rather than merely part-time) gymnasium and corporate entertainment venue…

Matthew Chapman
1 Chancery Lane

Image ©iStockphoto.com/webphotographeer

All information on this site was believed to be correct by the relevant authors at the time of writing. All content is for information purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. No liability is accepted by either the publisher or the author(s) for any errors or omissions (whether negligent or not) that it may contain. 

The opinions expressed in the articles are the authors' own, not those of Law Brief Publishing Ltd, and are not necessarily commensurate with general legal or medico-legal expert consensus of opinion and/or literature. Any medical content is not exhaustive but at a level for the non-medical reader to understand. 

Professional advice should always be obtained before applying any information to particular circumstances.

Excerpts from judgments and statutes are Crown copyright. Any Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of OPSI and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland under the Open Government Licence.