uksccrest2_400x400The joined appeals in Flood v Times Newspapers and Miller v Associated Newspapers in which the press arguing that CFA success fees and ATE insurance are contrary to Article 10 have been listed for a three day hearing on 24, 25 and 26 January 2017.

The appeal in Flood is from a decision of the Court of Appeal ([2014] EWCA Civ 1574) against the cost orders made by Nicola Davies J in the long running libel action brought by a former police officer against the Times.  The matter has already been to the Supreme Court once (see our posts here, here and here).

In its appeal, the Times contends that the costs order is an unjustified interference with its Article 10 and Article 6 rights.  It seeks a declaration that the success fees and ATE insurance premium claimed by Mr Flood are irrecoverable on the grounds that they are an unjustified interference with its Article 10 rights. Permission to appeal [pdf] was granted on 3 May 2016.

As we reported last month, on 2 August 2016, the Supreme Court gave the Daily Mail permission to bring a “leapfrog” appeal [pdf] from the decision of Mitting J on 5 February 2016 ([2016] EWHC 397 (QB)) who rejected its arguments based on Article 10.

It is not yet clear whether the third related case – MGN’s appeal from the decision of Mann J in 8 Representative Claimants v MGN Ltd ([2016] EWHC 855 (Ch)) – will be heard at the same time.

As we mentioned in our earlier post, if the appeal is successful it could mean an end to CFAs in publication cases.