header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
27 June 2013
Issue: 7556 / Categories: Features , Civil way
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 28 June 2013

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

The latest on Jackson

JACKCHAT

Gotcha!

If you thought you might escape paying an allocation fee on a plus £1,500 CPR Pt 7 claim on filing the new directions questionnaire (quite independently, of course, from your usual attempt at ducking the listing and hearing fees by drafting case management directions which provide for pre-trial checklists to be dispensed with) then think again. The Civil Proceedings Fees (Amendment) Order 2013 (SI 2013/734) which squeezed into force on 1 April 2013 having been made four days earlier (phew!) provides for the fee to be paid when an allocation or directions questionnaire is filed or when a case is allocated to track without a questionnaire. Another fees order is expected soon: court users are quaking.

Back door

Fixed costs in fast-track cases did not happen as Jackson LJ had envisaged and the amendment CPR unsurprisingly make no provision for fast-track costs management. How will proportionality be applied to fast tracks? Jackson LJ has suggested that the costs claimed by the fast-track receiving party might

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: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
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
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll