header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
21 May 2009 / Jennifer James
Issue: 7370 / Categories: Opinion , Costs
printer mail-detail

A one-way street?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Jennifer James contemplates Lord Justice Jackson’s legacy...

The Preliminary Report on Civil Litigation Costs by Lord Justice Rupert Jackson has been produced, following a whirlwind tour of various jurisdictions including the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, France and Germany, the bulk of which took place in late March/early April of this year. Having acted so promptly in producing the report, Jackson LJ expects his stakeholders to act equally promptly in responding thereto.

This is not as daunting a task as may first appear since many practitioners and interest groups will want to focus upon discrete areas of specific interest, thereby breaking the task down into more manageable tranches. Those of you practising under conditional fee agreements (CFAs) would be well advised to make time to read the report in time to raise comments upon it before the deadline of July 31, 2009.

One-way costs shifting in PI cases There are some radical suggestions floated in the report, one of which is so-called “one-way

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
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?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
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
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
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
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll