i) loser pays costs.
ii) if Ann is offered £X out of court, but declines it, and the case goes to court and she's awarded £Y then she has to pay costs if £Y is less than £X.
iii) Costs are controlled.
There are considerable problems with the English legal system, and many people are not able to seek justice through the court system. But this kind of thing would probably prevent some of the abuses of the US system.
i) (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2013/9780111533291/conte...) (http://www.justice.gov.uk/civil-justice-reforms) (http://www.justice.gov.uk/legal-aid/funding) (http://www.justice.gov.uk/legal-aid/areas-of-work/civil/high...)
ii) There was a case some years ago where two women (sisters?) were accused of swapping eggs. They were accused of taking cheap eggs out of the carton and putting expensive eggs in. They were offered a lot of money, but "wanted their day in court", and although the court said they didn't swap eggs the court offered a smaller amount in damages, which got wiped out by the costs they had to pay.
This is the kind of thing that I find tricky to web search for. It seems like it should be easy - ["legal case" "eggs"] and then various supermarket names. I should try limiting the date range to before 2005. But if anyone has any tips about how to better search for it I'd be grateful. (Of course, Usenet news probably has some discussion about it, but Google is sub-optimal for searching their Usenet archive. It's a great shame.)