header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
22 January 2009 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 7353 / Categories: Features , Company , EU , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Civil Way: 23 January 2009

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Litigious back-scratching in Europe
The lack of success fee
Fast track limit up

 

C’est Magnifique
Two new creatures for cross-border claims out of the European womb—the EOP (European Order for Payment) and the ESCP (the European Small Claims Procedure). The e EOP procedure is incorporated in Regulation 1896/2006/ EC of 12 July 2006 and the ESCP in Regulation 861/2007/EC of 11 July 2007. Both procedures have been brought into force in the UK. The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2008 (SI 2008/ 2178) introduced provisions operating alongside the regulations (see CPR and PD 78 and prescribed forms with 47th update). The e EOP procedure kicked off on 12 December 2008 and the ESCP on 1 January 2009. They are both without prejudice to existing cross-border procedures and apply throughout the EC subject to the customary opting out by Denmark thereby avoiding double Dutch pleading. Accommodating jurisdictional changes have been made by the High Court and County Court Jurisdiction (Amendment) Order
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

Read All
Sponsored by
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
Read All
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
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
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
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
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
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
NLJ this week: Diamond rings and broken promises

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: The battle over medical report fees intensifies
Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll