Third party liability claims on the Polish insurance market - a study of market trends and social attitudes
Analyses of trends on the third party liability insurance market have indicated in the recent years that the quantity and value of claims have been growing on all markets . The examination of reasons therefor reveals multiple factors, including also a change of social attitudes - a greater inclination of injured parties to assert claims and higher expectations as to the quality (extent) of compensation. This inclination results from social and economic factors. This paper describes current trends in this field on the Polish market in the context of experiences of other countries. It identifies the determinants of changes of attitudes of persons who assert claims and illustrates such attitudes with results of questionnaire surveys.
Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Damages Calculations: Transatlantic Dialogue
The volume focuses on litigation damages, economic and non-economic, including punitive damages; their definitions, calculations, and assignments in the US and EU. The objective is to examine areas of convergence and divergence in the academic and practical treatment of damages issues in the US and EU. Many of the chapters in the volume are drawn from the papers and discussions generated at the Transatlantic Dialogue meetings of the National Association of Forensic Economics that began in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 2004. That meeting focused on the development of the 'Ogden' multipliers for calculating damages mandated for consideration by UK Courts in 1999. The 2005 meetings (Dublin, Ireland) centred on Markov methodologies used in the US for generating work-life tables and their adoption into damages multipliers, punitive damages, and the process of Irish tort reform. In 2006 discussions in Florence, Italy, focused on methods for calculating non-economic damages in the US and EU as well as the process of harmonization of tort law within the EU. Most recently, the 2007 discussions in Barcelona, Spain, dealt with comparisons of scheduled damages systems in the US and the EU.
Seven Dogged Myths Concerning Contingency Fees
Myths and misinformation abounds concerning the American contingency fee system. In this paper I discuss seven common perceptions about contingency fees and present evidence that each is mistaken. The seven issues considered are (1) contingency fees are peculiarly American, (2) most contingency fee cases involve little risk, (3) advertising by the plaintiffs' bar has produced a flood of clients seeking compensation, (4) contingency fee lawyers accept most cases that potential clients bring to them, (5) contingency fee lawyers charge a standard fee of one-third of the recovery, (6) lawyers routinely obtain windfalls from contingency fees, and (7) the interests of contingency fee lawyers and their clients are routinely in conflict. The analysis in this paper draws heavily on material discussed in 'Risks, Reputations, and Rewards: Contingency Fee Legal Practice in the United States' (SSRN Abstract No. 572883).