Costs capping orders

Costs

Proposals allowing the Court of Appeal to make costs capping orders have been outlined in a Ministry of Justice (MoJ) consultation paper.

Willis v Nicolson [2007] All ER (D) 205 (Mar) considered whether it should provide guidance on costs capping. It found that it was for the Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) to decide whether, and with what urgency, it should take up any issues identified.

The CPRC found that the court did have jurisdiction but that it should approach the orders “conservatively” and should only be made in exceptional circumstances.

The committee has produced draft rules amending the Civil Procedure Rules 1998. The full consultation can be found on the MoJ web site. The deadline for responses is 24 October 2008.

Issue: 7338 / Categories: Legal News , Costs

Costs capping orders

Costs

Proposals allowing the Court of Appeal to make costs capping orders have been outlined in a Ministry of Justice (MoJ) consultation paper.

The CPRC found that the court did have jurisdiction but that it should approach the orders “conservatively” and should only be made in exceptional circumstances.

The committee has produced draft rules amending the Civil Procedure Rules 1998. The full consultation can be found on the MoJ web site. The deadline for responses is 24 October 2008.

Issue: 7338 / Categories: Legal News , Costs

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: CPR tweak closes third-party disclosure gap

A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing

NLJ this week: Court of Appeals wrestles with Mazur fallout

The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year

NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle

As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR

Error message

Costs capping orders

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar