header-logo header-logo

02 July 2009 / Elsa Booth
Issue: 7376 / Categories: Features , CPR
printer mail-detail

10 years of the CPR

Viewpoint

Central to Lord Woolf’s vision and the new culture 10 years ago was the desire for disputes to be resolved consensually; this was addressed through imposing a duty on litigants and their representatives to assist the court in furthering the Overriding Objective (CPR 1.3).

The active pursuit of a settlement rests on CPR 1.4(1)(e) and (f)—and active case management includes “helping the parties to settle the whole or part of the case”. Yet while the interlocutory skirmishing might have abated, it remains doubtful whether cases really are managed with a view to settling.
At the LexisNexis CPR debate, held in March to mark the 10th anniversary of the introduction of the Woolf reforms, DJ Michael Walker said the pre-trial process was now less adversarial and that he felt the duty to co-operate had made a huge difference. But Sir Anthony Clarke MR, also speaking at the debate, surely came closer to the reality in his more circumspect view that the duty to co-operate was worthwhile but had not driven out the adversarial.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll