header-logo header-logo

11 August 2017 / Francis Kendall
Issue: 7758 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs , Budgeting
printer mail-detail

Electronic billing: the pros & cons

Computers cannot & should not replace the experience of practitioners & the judiciary, says Francis Kendall

Following various pilots since 2015, there has been minimal, arguably no, uptake of the concept of electronic bills of costs at the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO). However, the Civil Procedure Rule Committee has now proposed that electronic bills will become compulsory in the SCCO and the county courts from 6 April 2018.

“ My overriding concern is that the moves inspired by Jackson LJ to deal with costs in litigation seem to impact those practising in costs more than the litigation itself”

The proposal remains subject to ministerial and parliamentary approval but that seems likely to be given, although the implementation date could change depending on when these are received. The changes to the CPR will most likely be included in the next scheduled update, allowing for voluntary use from October.

One has to recognise the hard work undertaken by the Hutton committee

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

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
back-to-top-scroll