Setting The Standard In Advocacy
/lpc-law
LPC Law's Essential News Publication Linking you to legal updates, articles and news uploaded to our website each month.
The Advocator
Contents
@LPC_Law
A
Text
03 Legal News: A Case Of Interest 04 Legal News: FCA Publishes Review Of The Fair Treatment Of Existing Interest Only Mortgage Customers & RTA Personal Injury Reforms To Be Implemented From April 2019 05 Legal News: Rules Of Service Turn Out To Be A Right Hassle For Litigant In Person 06 Mediation Monthly- Mediation On The Road!
March 2018
/03
A Case Of Interest
Legal News
The Court of Appeal’s judgment in Lorna Carrasco v. Rebecca Johnson[2018] EWCA Civ 87 is a rare and instructive authority as to how awards for statutory interest should be determined. At first instance, the Claimant succeeded in a claim against the Defendant and the trial judge, District Judge Langley, awarded statutory interest at the rate of 3% noting, amongst other factors, that the loan was between private individuals, that interest was awarded to compensate claimants from being kept out of their money rather than as compensation for damage done as a result of not having the funds, that the Bank of England’s base rate at the time was 0.5% and the judgment rate was 8%. The Claimant appealed on a number of grounds, including that the rate of 3% did not reflect the actual cost to the Claimant of being kept out of their money or the cost of borrowing at the time. The Court’s judgment considered a number of previous decisions and set out 5 points of guidance: 1. Interest is awarded to compensate claimants for being kept out of money which ought to have been paid to them rather than as compensation for damage done or to deprive defendants of profit they may have made from the use of the money; 2. This is a question to be approached broadly. The court will consider the position of persons with the claimants' general attributes, but will not have regard to claimants' particular attributes or any special position in which they may have been; 3. In relation to commercial claimants the general presumption will be that they would have borrowed less and so the court will have regard to the rate at which persons with the general attributes of the claimant could have borrowed. This is likely to be a percentage over base rate and may be higher for small businesses than for first class borrowers; 4. In relation to personal injury claimants the general presumption will be that the appropriate rate of interest is the investment rate; and 5. Many claimants will not fall clearly into a category of those who would have borrowed or those who would have put money on deposit and a fair rate for them may often fall somewhere between those two rates. In relation to the particular case the Court concluded that the District Judge had been correct in their approach and was entitled to treat the Claimant as someone falling between the categories of investor and borrower. The rate of 3% was held to be appropriate.
/04
The Supreme Court have upheld the decisions of the lower Courts in Barton v. Wright Hassall LLP [2018] UKSC 12 not to afford a litigant in person special dispensation in relation to the usual rules of service. The Appellant had served a claim form on the Respondent’s solicitor by e-mail, without obtaining prior confirmation that they were willing to accept e-mail service of the document, in accordance with CPR 6APD.4. The Respondent’s solicitor did not reply until some days later to explain that they did not accept service by this method and, as a result, the claim form was not served in accordance with the relevant limitation period. The Appellant sought an order that his e-mail to the Respondent’s solicitor be validated as service under CPR 6.15(2). His request was refused by a District Judge on the basis that there was “no good reason” to make the order requested as the usual routes for service within the CPR had not been exhausted first, notwithstanding that the claim form had been received by the Respondent’s solicitor. The District Judge’s decision was upheld, although re-reasoned by a Circuit Judge, before the Appellant unsuccessfully renewed his appeal to the Court of Appeal and then the Supreme Court. Interestingly, two of the Supreme Court’s Judges (Lord Briggs and Lady Hale) dissented, taking the view that the Appellant’s misconception, namely that service could be permitted by e-mail, was reasonable in the circumstances. They questioned how long the current constraints on service by e-mail will continue to serve a useful purpose. It is widely expected that the Civil Procedure Rule Committee will review these provisions following the Court’s judgments.
Ministers have confirmed to the Motor Accident Solicitors Society that the planned reforms will be implemented from April 2019. The reforms, contained in the Civil Liability Bill, will introduce a tariff system for damages in relation to soft tissue injuries and will increase the small claims limit for RTA related claims from £1,000.00 to £5,000.00. The controversial reforms previously formed part of the Prisons and Courts Bill, although this failed to progress through Parliament as a result of the 2017 General Election.
Pete Blackmore Advocacy Manager (Midland, Wales, Northern & North-Eastern Circuits)
/05
The FCA, having recognized the treatment of existing interest-only mortgage customers as a key risk in their 2017/18 business plan, have conducted a review of how lenders have been treating customers and published their findings. The results are generally positive for lenders. The FCA found that lenders had made progress in the fair treatment of these customers and had strategies in place to contact customers and discuss their repayment plans (or lack thereof in some cases). In almost all cases, the FCA concluded that lenders were recommending repayment options that were likely to be fair and were reducing the potential harm caused by non-payment of the capital sum at the expiry of the mortgage. The FCA was concerned however that many borrowers were not engaging with their lenders to discuss their repayment plans and has issued both a statement urging action and an information leaflet for interest-only customers.
RTA Personal Injury Reforms To Be Implemented From April 2019
Rules Of Service Turn Out To Be A Right Hassle For Litigant In Person
FCA Publishes Review Of The Fair Treatment Of Existing Interest Only Mortgage Customers
Mediation On The Road!
/06
Laura-Pauline Adcock-Jones Mediation Manager
Following the launch of our Mediation Department last year and further to the success of our Mediation Conference in October 2017, which was held in support of Mediation Awareness Week, LPC Law are offering to visit clients who are interested in our mediation services to provide further information or training on this area. Training can be tailored to meet client needs in respect of particular disputes and could involve a visit to your office, a presentation and practical mediation exercises ranging from a case review or even a mock mediation simulation. For further insight into what LPC Law can provide during training, please click the following link HERE to our EventBrite page for our Mediation Conference in October 2017. If you would like to discuss particular requirements and available dates, please contact Laura via mediation@lpc-law.co.uk.
Mediation Monthly
