header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
25 November 2022 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 8004 / Categories: Opinion , Costs , Personal injury , Damages
printer mail-detail

The insider: 25 November 2022

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
101338
Dominic Regan sees February and October in the fixed costs tea leaves, predicts Belsnerphobia in Wolverhampton, and shares the joy of swag

Fixed costs

I was in the front row at the Civil Justice Council National Forum last Friday. Lord Bellamy KC, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Ministry of Justice, who has held office for almost an eternity (over five months) announced yet further delay to the Fixed Costs Rules. They are now going to come into force in October 2023.

The ministry is a soft target for criticism, but I am assured by the top brass that the concern was to ensure practitioners had a decent amount of time to digest the new measures, which I think might now be unveiled in February.

Belsner

Fear stalks the streets of Wolverhampton. Those employed at the office of the Legal Ombudsman, already burdened with a backlog, must be terrified at the thought of thousands of costs disputes coming their way, as strongly recommended by the Master

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