header-logo header-logo

Jackson’s e-bills become compulsory

06 April 2018
Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-detail

Solicitors should expect ‘significant teething problems’ with e-billing, which became compulsory in the county court and Senior Court Costs Office this week, the Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL) has warned.

However, it also urged solicitors not to ignore or be scared off by the change.

The new rules apply to multi-track claims unless fixed costs or scale costs apply, the receiving party is unrepresented or the court has ordered otherwise. Any work done from 6 April 2018 on must be an electronic bill.

However, there is a get-out clause—either on application by the parties or of its own motion, the court can disapply the requirement for an electronic bill.

ACL chairman Iain Stark said: ‘We are concerned that some judges have yet to receive training and/or the technology to view the bill from the bench, so this could initially be a popular course.

‘The reality is that some firms of solicitors are ready for “E-Day”, and have adopted the J-Codes model of recording work by phase, task and activity. Others still work from paper files. It will be a bumpy ride for them at first.’

ACL council member Claire Green, who has been leading the ACL’s work on the electronic bill, said the new bill would be a work in progress for some time, for judiciary, practitioners and the rule committee alike, and the practice direction was likely to need updating quickly.

‘The new bill will change the whole ethos and environment we’re working in, and we are concerned that too many people seem unaware of what’s coming,’ she said.

Work in progress includes the ACL’s version of the bill, with its technical team currently updating version 16. Green described Precedent S, the form for e-billing, as ‘very complicated’. She said she is working towards ‘getting everyone to use the ACL bill’, although any format that complies with certain requirements is acceptable.

The new bill is one of the last of Lord Justice Jackson’s recommendations to be implemented, and the judge himself said recently that it was bound to save time and costs. In his final speech before retiring last month, he said: ‘I predict that in three years from now people will be amazed that we had put up with the old paper-based bill for so long.’

Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll