The purpose of this update is to provide an overview of the important points that emerge from the point of view of legal aid in the context of the new provisions relating to successful fee agreements. A potential problem for insurers/defendants resulting from the settlements was identified during the consultation process. Future losses recovered by an applicant, such as care costs. B, are not limited to the application of the ceiling. With respect to the regulations in this version, plaintiff lawyers may benefit from up to 2.5% of all damages recovered over $500,000 as part of their success costs. As a result, there must be a significant risk that the applicant will not receive enough money to meet his or her future needs. The courts will be aware of this, and there is therefore a risk that, over time, some sheriffs/judges may influence the increase in damages to reflect the amounts that complainants must pay to their lawyers. Currently, this is only a theoretical risk and judicial claims need to be closely monitored to determine whether a model is emerging. The caps provide greater security for clients who enter into successful fee contracts – Regulation 2 sets ceilings for success fees for various legal areas and it should be noted that successful fee agreements cannot be used in family proceedings unless the success fees are included in a speculative agreement and not based on a compensation agreement. Until now, results-related agreements, also known as conditional pricing agreements or conditional pricing agreements proposed by lawyers in Scotland, have been limited to speculative royalty agreements which, if successful, are subject to an increase in the levy.
These additional costs are normally calculated on the basis of the royalty element of the court costs or calculated as an increase in the lawyer`s hourly rate if successful and not as a percentage of the damage awarded in the case. The amount that service providers charge in successful fee contracts is currently highly variable. The report on the “Review of Expenditure and Funding for Civil Trials in Scotland” made a recommendation on the ceilings. The Scottish Government is asking service providers and potential parties to decide whether the recommended caps are fair or whether different caps should be considered. The law in its introduction excluded family procedures from successful fee contracts. However, an interested party found that, in such cases, some sort of contract on earnings compensation – the speculative royalty agreement – had been used.