header-logo header-logo

Disclosure pilot gets green light

01 August 2018
Issue: 7804 / Categories: Legal News , E-disclosure
printer mail-detail
ed_crosse

Flexible approach to be trialled in response to feedback from end users

The Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) has given its approval for the launch of a two-year Disclosure Pilot Scheme for cases proceeding in the Business & Property Courts of England and Wales.

The pilot, which is due to commence on 1 January 2019, is a response to increasing demands from disputes practitioners and clients to find more effective ways of tackling the ‘monster’ of electronic disclosure, where the volume of data that parties typically process and disclose can run into many hundreds of gigabytes.

Sir Geoffrey Vos, Chancellor of the High Court said: ‘I am delighted that the disclosure pilot is now being brought into effect. It is a much-needed and far-sighted reform. There will now be a menu of options available to litigants so that disclosure can be targeted appropriately to the kind of case that is being litigated.’

Ed Crosse, (pictured), immediate past president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association (LSLA) and one of the four members of the Disclosure Working Group responsible for drafting the rules, said: ‘The pilot scheme is much needed and will be a success provided clients, the legal profession and judges truly embrace the new rules.’

Julian Acratopulo, president of the LSLA said: ‘The reforms provide a procedural framework within which litigants can continue to enjoy all the benefits of disclosure in appropriate cases, but with the flexibility to apply a lighter touch, where necessary.

‘This flexible approach is responsive to the feedback of end users and should help to maintain London’s preeminent position on the world litigation stage post-Brexit.’

With some limited exceptions, the scheme will apply to existing and new proceedings across the Business and Property Courts in the Rolls Building and in the centres of Bristol, Birmingham, Cardiff, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester and Newcastle for a two-year period, commencing in January 2019.

Copies of the draft Practice Direction and Disclosure Review Documents are available on the Business and Property Court website at www.judiciary.uk.

Issue: 7804 / Categories: Legal News , E-disclosure
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll