header-logo header-logo

Jackson report counts the cost

14 May 2009
Issue: 7369 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Costs
printer mail-detail

Access to justice and fairness core to ambitious review of civil litigation costs

Lord Justice Jackson launched his preliminary report into the cost of civil litigation at a press conference last Friday.

The 650-page report is the culmination of four months of research, and covers how civil litigation is—or could be funded—legal aid, before and after-the-event insurance, third party funding, conditional fee agreements, and contingency fees.

The report looks at the present regime of fixed costs, as well as ways to control the costs of litigation, such as case management, cost capping, and recoverability of success fees.

Peter Clough, head of disputes at Osborne Clark, says: “Lord Justice Jackson and his team have taken on a huge task in his root-and-branch review of civil litigation costs. It’s a very ambitious project on a complex set of issues. Although this preliminary report gives little away about his current thinking, it highlights the areas upon which he would like comments during the consultation.

“One area of concern expressed to him relates to the costs of exchanging documents about the disputes. If the final report suggests any radical changes, it will be interesting to see if there is sufficient political will to implement them in the current economic climate.”

Amanda Wadey, a solicitor at LexisPSL, commended the breadth of Jackson LJ’s remit and the amount he has already achieved in four months. “While he accepts that we are confined to some extent by our common law system it is clear that he is starting with a clean sheet,” she says. “His exploration of civil code jurisdictions shows that he does not consider himself confined by the current structure. It is evident that access to justice is at the core of this root and branch review and this has to be applauded.”

Jackson LJ is consulting on his report until the end of July and intends to publish his final report in December. The report is available at http://www.judiciary.gov. uk/about_judiciary/cost-review/ preliminary-report.htm (see this issue pp 683, 685 & 706).

Issue: 7369 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Costs
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