The basis of QOCS is that the protection it affords against adverse costs applies to unsuccessful claims for personal injuries. These are conventionally argued in negligence against the defendant whose conduct caused the accident e.g. the negligent driver or employer. But should a statutory claim against an organisation which was not the tortfeasor be regarded as a claim for damages for personal injuries protected by QOCS?
The 2017 general election changed the political shape of the House of Commons. Mathematically, the number of 650 MPs equals that of a square pyramid (144+121+100+81+64+49+36+25+16+9+4+1); although it might be said that the hung Parliament that the election has produced is not necessarily as robust as its arithmetical analogue.
At 328, the sum of Conservative (318) and DUP (10) seats would be sufficient to govern and this seems to be where matters are headed. What might these developments mean for insurance-related measures which had been shelved or side-lined pending the election?
On 31 January 2017 the EU Justice Sub-Committee heard further evidence in its enquiry into the arrangements for civil justice co-operation and the role of Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) after the UK leaves the EU. In the hot seat this time was Sir Oliver Heald QC MP, Minister of State for Justice. Senior judges, academics and practitioners have already appeared before the Sub-Committee during the course of this ongoing enquiry.