header-logo header-logo

14 December 2012 / Mark Solon
Issue: 7542 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail

Question time

Mark Solon speaks to the experts

Over a third of expert witnesses believe that the reforms proposed by Lord Justice Jackson in his 2010 report will lead to injustices according to Bond Solon’s latest expert witness survey.

Of the 320 expert witnesses who attended Bond Solon’s annual expert witness conference last month, 146 returned their views on the latest legal developments. These include the impact of the reforms on their fees and the number of instructions they receive, as well as the success of cost cutting initiatives such as concurrent evidence in court (or hot tubbing).

Fees

The Jackson reforms recommend a number of measures to curb the rising cost of litigation. However, asked whether cost management—a central tenet of the reforms under which the parties draft a budget for each stage of the proceedings—will lead to a cut in their fees, over a third of experts (36%) said no. Only 27% of experts believe the new provisions will lead to a reduction in their fees and 32% are still undecided. The remaining

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

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll