William Gibson says costs management should be left to the experts, not judges
Lord Justice Jackson noted in his final report on the costs of civil litigation that there was “no great groundswell of enthusiasm amongst either judges or practitioners for learning all about costs”. (p 416). Nowhere is this more obvious than in the majority of out-of-London county courts, where detailed assessments are considered by some district judges with indifference, some with despair, some with outright distaste or aggression. Although, in the wake of Jackson LJ’s findings the Judicial Studies Board is due to begin training in costs and case management for the judiciary, this training will not be compulsory. Without compulsory training these attitudes to involvement with costs are unlikely to change.
Room for improvement?
As with so many “improvements” the Jackson proposals seem aimed at giving benefits to defendants. In his preliminary report Sir Rupert said: “Many personal injury claims...are relatively straightforward matters, which should be capable of fair resolution without the defendant’s insurers paying out sums to lawyers and experts
