header-logo header-logo

08 April 2016 / Ed Crosse
Issue: 7693 / Categories: Opinion , Litigation trends
printer mail-detail

Change for the better

istock_000009622275_web

It’s time for lawyers to take a constructive view about change, says Ed Crosse

When you talk to civil litigators in London, one topic that always comes up is the pace of change. We face constant shifts in the way that the courts operate and the rules to which we must adhere. The Civil Procedure Rules change every year, while new pilot schemes seem to launch every few months, introducing new ways of working for specific types of cases.

Yet standing still is not an option if London’s courts are to continue to be the forum of choice for domestic and international disputes. The realities of reduced funding for the justice system and increased competition both from arbitration and from other jurisdictions, means that practitioners and the courts need to embrace change. Only by engaging with this process will lawyers have an influence in ensuring that best ideas prevail and the unworkable are put aside.

Some of what is currently under consideration, such as yet higher court fees and fixed costs in cases

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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll