header-logo header-logo

16 September 2010 / Jovita Vassallo
Issue: 7433 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

The new litigation landscape

The judiciary is increasingly taking a pragmatic approach to case management and using its discretion—enshrined in the Civil Procedure Rules—to the widest degree, with radical consequences.

The judiciary is increasingly taking a pragmatic approach to case management and using its discretion—enshrined in the Civil Procedure Rules—to the widest degree, with radical consequences.

It seems that committees are regularly being set up to reform litigation practice and procedure, the latest being the under-secretary of state for justice’s announcement, on 26 July 2010, that there will be a consultation this autumn on Lord Justice Jackson’s proposals for the reform of litigation funding arrangements. Practitioners have no choice but to take advantage of the new order, or be left behind.

This article focuses on electronic or “e-”working and how the fast pace of reform of litigation practice and the persistent judicial drive to reduce costs is impacting on preparation for trial. The second article will focus on preparing and serving evidence, tactical steps and how digitalised documents can be recycled for use in witness statements. The

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll