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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll