header-logo header-logo

06 October 2011 / Janna Purdie , Ruth Pratt
Issue: 7484 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , LexisPSL , CPR
printer mail-detail

All change

Ruth Pratt & Janna Purdie provide an update on the recent changes to the civil procedure rules

The routine civil procedure rules (CPR) updates which generally take place in October have, this year, been spread over the period of two months from 1 August to 1 October. The updates range from amendments to CPR rules and practice directions through to new practice directions. The changes cover a diverse range of issues and the following provides a brief overview of the areas subject to change. If practising in any of these areas it is important to make sure that you consider the issues in more depth and are aware of the impact the changes will have on the work you undertake.

Changes effective from August 2011

A new practice direction, CPR PD 51F came into force on 1 August, launching a pilot scheme which is due to operate until 31 July 2012. The scheme has been set up to collate data on the number and types of non-disclosure injunctions (aka “privacy” and “super” injunctions) being processed through the courts. The information

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll