Dominic Regan reports on “unwordly” fixed costs & the missing impact assessment
Sir Rupert Jackson has achieved something remarkable, which is unanimity within the entire legal profession. The unfortunate detail is that absolutely everyone I have spoken to considers that his recent proposals for an all-embracing fixed costs regime applicable to claims worth up to £250,000 to be preposterous.
Common view
The soundings I have taken are extensive. Silks, small practices, City firms and, perhaps surprisingly, defendants share a common view: the proposed reform would lead to an immense injustice. Parties and the greater civil legal edifice would inevitably be worse off .
In his speech of 28 January 2016 Jackson LJ spoke of bringing fixed costs into the lower foothills of multi-track litigation (see "Jackson: this man is not for turning", NLJ , 5 February 2016, p 7). The entry point of this track is £25,000. To capture a case worth four, eight or ten times as much is
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
