header-logo header-logo

07 January 2016 / David Greene
Issue: 7681 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

​New year: same headache?

nlj_7681_greene

David Greene welcomes the government’s recent U-turn on upping civil court fees but fears the reprieve may be short-lived

2015 ended on a high note with a piece of good news from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) telling us that the increase in the court fees cap that had been proposed is not to proceed for the time being. The government’s response paper painted a picture of wholesale opposition to the increase. Of 110 responses, 103 disagreed with the proposal. Even with that opposition, one always wonders whether it makes any difference. On this occasion it seems to have done so. Perhaps, however, it is a short lived reprieve. In any event civil courts may have achieved a reprieve but many of the proposed increases of fees in other tribunals are being implemented.

Domestic & international arguments

Two arguments always surround the issue of court fees, one domestic and the other international. The domestic question is the balancing exercise between a civil justice process that pays for itself (thus meeting the Osborne goal of an economy

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

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

Financial services and regulatory offering boosted by partner hires

NEWS
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll