tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7058786915356669476.post9150984587522681088..comments2024-03-27T08:57:40.383+00:00Comments on SOLO IP <br> for sole and small IP practices<br>: The name of the game: CONTRO£?Filemothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15735898485265104580noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7058786915356669476.post-75510382674184245202008-06-27T11:04:00.000+01:002008-06-27T11:04:00.000+01:00The considerable financial risk of no-win no fee i...The considerable financial risk of no-win no fee is really not a great idea for the solo practitioner. <BR/>I have looked at doing litigation on the no-win no fee basis in IP cases. I have located two providers of after the event insurance which is essential if the client is not to risk a damaging costs order. <BR/>There is <A HREF="http://www.lawassist.co.uk/" REL="nofollow"> LawAssist </A> which is Litigation Protection Ltd and linked to Commercial Litigation Funding Ltd. They wanted a significant assessment fee of £295 and a barrister's opinion. Sorry a litigator certificate doesn't qualify you to give that opinion. The other is <A HREF="www.firstassist.co.uk" REL="nofollow">FirstAssist Insurance Service Limited</A>. They also charged an assessment fee but didn't ask for a barrister's opinion - so its cheaper to get a refusal from them.<BR/>Candidly, there are no racing certainties in IP cases and it's only those cases that insurers will take. If there were good chances and available insurance Daniel Gersch would have sued Google instead of wasting his time in an <A HREF="http://oami.europa.eu/LegalDocs/BoA/2007/en/R0252_2007-2.pdf" REL="nofollow">OHIM oppositon</A>. Even a win in the Board of Appeal is only a moral victory and €1200 in costs. Did they pay, I hope so. Maybe Addleshaw Goddard should make him an offer.Filemothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15735898485265104580noreply@blogger.com