header-logo header-logo

Jackson-style fixed costs get the nod in the fast track

08 September 2021
Issue: 7947 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail
Fixed recoverable costs are to be extended to all cases in the fast track (valued up to £25,000) and, via a new regime, to ‘simpler’ cases valued up to £100,000, the Lord Chancellor, Robert Buckland QC has confirmed

Costs budgeting will be introduced for judicial review cases where either party’s costs are likely to exceed £100,000.

The MoJ announced the details of its decision this week, in its long-awaited response to its ‘Consultation on extending fixed recoverable costs in civil cases’, which was first published in March 2019 and was based on proposals in Sir Rupert Jackson’s 2017 report on civil justice costs. Buckland said the Civil Procedure Rules Committee will now draft rules to be implemented ‘over the coming year’.

However, Neil McKinley, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL), said the MoJ’s decision ‘misses the point that most personal injury cases really are complex and cannot simply be shoe-horned into a simpler system with which they are just not compatible.

‘Employers’ liability disease claims, for example, can be incredibly complex, as can product liability claims, yet both categories of claim are to be included in this new system. The MoJ has also provided little detail about how this will work, leaving it to “the parties and judges” to work that out. That will take time and, until we get clarity on these matters, injured people will be subjected to a great deal of uncertainty at a time when they are very vulnerable.’

Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL) chair Claire Green said: ‘The question of fixed costs ultimately comes down to the figures.

‘Do they provide genuine access to justice and allow a party to conduct litigation effectively, or do they only work for the privileged few who can afford to pay for litigation irrespective of what they recover from an opponent. The proposed figures for the fixed costs adopted by the MoJ were based on just one law firm’s sample of cases, where it acted for the defendants.

‘The government needs a much more rigorous statistical base if it is to widen the use of fixed costs, and also needs to commit to regularly reviewing and updating them.’

Issue: 7947 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll