header-logo header-logo

05 August 2010 / Matthew Amey
Issue: 7429 / Categories: Opinion , Costs
printer mail-detail

More haste, less speed?

The coalition government has announced a consultation process in the autumn on the implementation of certain key recommendations from Lord Justice Jackson’s report Review of Civil Litigation Costs.

Matthew Amey questions the government’s rush to reform costs

The coalition government has announced a consultation process in the autumn on the implementation of certain key recommendations from Lord Justice Jackson’s report Review of Civil Litigation Costs. The government have indicated that they wish to prioritise a review of the recommendations in respect of conditional fee arrangements (CFAs), after the event (ATE) insurance and the viability of contingency fee arrangements.

The government’s preference to fast-track a review on these particular issues will be of concern to the ATE legal expenses insurance industry, whose very existence is threatened by two of the core recommendations in the Jackson report. Jackson LJ recommends an end to the recoverability of CFA success fees and ATE premiums in addition to the implementation of qualified one-way cost shifting, which would remove

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

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