header-logo header-logo

11 March 2010 / Andrew Parker
Issue: 7408 / Categories: Opinion , Costs
printer mail-detail

Access all areas

Public, not vested, interests lie at the heart of Jackson LJ’s final report,says Andrew Parker

It is clear from Sir Rupert Jackson’s final report that access to justice has been at the forefront of his mind when reshaping the litigation landscape. The balance is that access must be both for claimants with valid claims and for defendants with valid defences. That is the public interest focus that lies at the heart of the whole report, cutting through the many pleas of vested interests.

Thus the decision to recommend that recovery of success fees and after the event (ATE) insurance premiums should cease to be recoverable is taken in the full knowledge that there must be some acceptable alternative (NLJ, 26 February 2010, p 294) Sir Rupert has settled on “qualified one-way costs shifting”, which would ensure protection for the vast majority of claimants who currently use ATE from any exposure to opponents’ costs, save where the claimant fails to beat a defendant’s Pt 36 offer.

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll