header-logo header-logo

08 September 2021
Issue: 7947 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Jackson-style fixed costs get the nod in the fast track

Fixed recoverable costs are to be extended to all cases in the fast track (valued up to £25,000) and, via a new regime, to ‘simpler’ cases valued up to £100,000, the Lord Chancellor, Robert Buckland QC has confirmed

Costs budgeting will be introduced for judicial review cases where either party’s costs are likely to exceed £100,000.

The MoJ announced the details of its decision this week, in its long-awaited response to its ‘Consultation on extending fixed recoverable costs in civil cases’, which was first published in March 2019 and was based on proposals in Sir Rupert Jackson’s 2017 report on civil justice costs. Buckland said the Civil Procedure Rules Committee will now draft rules to be implemented ‘over the coming year’.

However, Neil McKinley, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL), said the MoJ’s decision ‘misses the point that most personal injury cases really are complex and cannot simply be shoe-horned into a simpler system with which they are just not compatible.

‘Employers’ liability disease claims, for example, can be incredibly complex, as can product liability claims, yet both categories of claim are to be included in this new system. The MoJ has also provided little detail about how this will work, leaving it to “the parties and judges” to work that out. That will take time and, until we get clarity on these matters, injured people will be subjected to a great deal of uncertainty at a time when they are very vulnerable.’

Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL) chair Claire Green said: ‘The question of fixed costs ultimately comes down to the figures.

‘Do they provide genuine access to justice and allow a party to conduct litigation effectively, or do they only work for the privileged few who can afford to pay for litigation irrespective of what they recover from an opponent. The proposed figures for the fixed costs adopted by the MoJ were based on just one law firm’s sample of cases, where it acted for the defendants.

‘The government needs a much more rigorous statistical base if it is to widen the use of fixed costs, and also needs to commit to regularly reviewing and updating them.’

Issue: 7947 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll