Mesothelioma lawyers 'not required to charge success fee'

There is "no requirement" for claimant lawyers in mesothelioma cases to charge success fees, justice minister Shailesh Vara has said.

Speaking at a Westminster Hall debate yesterday called by Labour MP Andy McDonald, Vara said the amount of any success fee was "a matter of negotiation between claimants and their lawyers".

He said claimants would benefit from one-way costs shifting and ATE insurance premiums were "expected to reduce".

Vara said the government had "carefully considered" the likely effect of implementing the LASPO reforms on mesothelioma claims, but the issues raised were "generally similar to those in other very serious personal injury cases" to which the Jackson reforms already applied.

Vara said that there needed to be "specific justification for the continued difference in treatment between mesothelioma cases and other personal injury cases", particularly those involving catastrophic injury and substantial care arrangements.

"Without in any way seeking to minimise the distress that this entails, however, there are many other serious personal injury and fatal claims, to which the LASPO reforms already apply, that produce difficult challenges for victims and families."

Vara said that when the reforms took effect, claimants would be entitled to a 10 per cent increase in general damages. Since the average general damages for mesothelioma cases was £70,000, this would produce an average additional £7,000.

"The LASPO reforms are about tackling the high cost of civil litigation, rather than questioning the validity of claims," he added.

Vara said the Ministry of Justice had conducted the review of the impact of abolishing the mesothelioma exemption as required by LASPO, and "as soon as we are able to do so", would publish the report.

McDonald said earlier in the debate: "The problem with the new cost regime is, first, that a successful claimant will pay up to 25 per cent of their general damages as success fees.

"Secondly, to mitigate that attack on their damages, a claimant will have to shop around for a cheaper lawyer. Thirdly, the qualified one-way costs shifting does not provide a complete defence against costs.

"It does not address disbursements, part 36 offers or issues where a court decides that a claim has been misconducted.

"Finally, there are far fewer lawyers who will be able under the new regime to take on such cases. It may be that not only will people have to pay their own costs out of the damages but they may not be able to bring the case at all."

Matthew Stockwell, president of APIL, added: "Mesothelioma claimants know they are going to die, and they know they have to race against the clock when they make a claim.

"They are simply trying to make their last few months more bearable, and to ensure that their families will have some security when they're gone. If ever a claimant needed full compensation, it is surely the claimant facing a death sentence just because he turned up for work."