You are viewing your 1 free article this month. Login to read more articles.
Publishers have welcomed proposals to cut charges claimed by 'no-win, no-fee' lawyers in successful libel cases, but warned this change alone would be just cosmetic.
The Ministry of Justice this week announced a four-week consultation period looking at cutting success fees from 100% to 10%. The current law allows lawyers to double their fees under conditional fee agreements, by claiming a success bonus of up to 100% on top of their usual charge.
John Blake said he was "totally, 100%, in favour" of the move. He said: "It's a total scandal, and is stopping all sorts of books from being published - it's a problem for all of us... The way the law is, [lawyers] can charge what they like. The pendulum has swung too far."
Simon Flynn, m.d of Icon Books, agreed the change was a positive step, but was more circumspect about the impact from this move alone.
"The most crucial issue is that the burden of proof remains with the publisher - you are guilty until proven innocent as it stands. This is definitely good news, but it’s just about reducing a mosquito-level irritation, not tackling the fundamental issues," he said.
"If you are rich, it doesn't make any difference - a lot of these guys just want to gag publishers or the press, so it's not about winning. And injunctions, or super injunctions, are a separate issue again."
In announcing the proposals, justice secretary Jack Straw said they were additional to the current review, which was considering a possible reform of the laws in England and Wales, particularly with a view to libel tourism.
He said: "Lawyers need to recover their costs and be rewarded for their efforts and the risks they undertake when providing people with access to justice in 'no win, no fee' cases. But evidence suggests that the regular doubling of fees that currently takes place is simply not justified and the balance of costs between claimant and defendant needs to be reconsidered.
"The case for an urgent interim measure for dealing with success fees in defamation cases has become clear; that is why I am publishing this important consultation paper today."