header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
02 April 2015 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 7647 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Jackson: decline & fall

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7647_regan_cover

Dominic Regan expresses dismay over the MoJ’s undermining of the Jackson Report

Sir Rupert Jackson kept his end of an onerous bargain. His remit was to regularise the litigation process, enabling litigants to secure justice at proportionate cost. His final report on publication was described as masterful by Lord Neuberger and the then Lord Chief Justice gave it his total support.

What went wrong? Plenty. The culprit was not the legal profession, which did not like some changes. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) failed to keep faith. In some areas it did the absolute opposite of what Jackson had recommended after a hefty two years of enquiry and reflection.

Most damaging reform

The single most damaging reform, which has meant that the litigation process is now worse than before the 2013 changes, has been the outrageous hike in court fees. The judiciary spoke with one voice in condemning the changes. The MoJ had decided fees were to rise and that was that. Incalculable damage has been done. If one thinks of the issue fee

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
Sidley—James Inness

Sidley—James Inness

Partner joins capital markets team in London office

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Firm announces appointment of partner as UK general counsel

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Firm appoints first chief marketing officer to drive growth strategy

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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll