Login
ALRC’s recommendations mostly ‘sensible and measured’, says S&G
Slater and Gordon has backed the recommendations set out by the Australian Law Reform Commission’s inquiry into class actions and litigation funding, saying that they are “for the most part, sensible and measured”.
The commission handed down the recommendations into its Inquiry into Class Actions Proceedings and Third Party Litigation Funders last week following a lengthy 12-month review into the channels.
To continue reading the rest of this article, please log in.
Create free account to get unlimited news articles and more!
“The commission’s recommendations are, for the most part, sensible and measured,” said Slater and Gordon head of class actions Ben Hardwick.
“The commission certainly hasn’t seen the need for wholesale changes to the regime, and largely seeks to codify the case management techniques that have been developed by the courts.
“On the whole it is a ringing endorsement of laws that have been providing access to justice for tens of thousands of ordinary Australians over the last 27 years.”
One of the key recommendations handed down by the ALRC was a proposal to introduce contigency fees in class actions. If such a proposal was to go ahead it would mean that lawyers would be permitted to charge clients fees calculated at a percentage of the damages recovered as an alternative to what is the current time-costed billing model.
“This is the third consecutive government report which has recommended the introduction of contingency fees. Anyone who spends any time analysing this issue comes to the same conclusion that it is overwhelmingly in the interests of consumers to do so,” Mr Hardwick said in response to the recommendation.
“As a leading plaintiff law firm with decades-long experience in obtaining redress for clients, we firmly believe alternative forms of charging fees will offer a further means for our clients to collectively advance their claims and pursue cases which may not otherwise be viable,” he said.
“Even those normally on the other side of the class actions debate would have to concede that a court supervised contingency fee model, such as proposed by the commission, will create greater options for everyday Australians and that it makes economic sense to make that option available,” Mr Hardwick said.
Further, Mr Hardwick said Slaters welcomed the commission’s proposal to put out to tender the work involved in settlement scheme administration.
“We see competition as a good thing. For over 25 years we have developed quality techniques and systems for distributing compensation to group members in class actions in the shortest and most cost-effective way possible,” he said.
“Ultimately, group members in class actions want to talk to lawyers not accountants, so any system that routes group members through intermediaries back to lawyers, will ultimately prove to be less efficient.”
