header-logo header-logo

17 May 2007
Issue: 7273 / Categories: Legal News , Judicial review , Costs
printer mail-detail

Row brews over very high cost cases

The Law Society is threatening legal action against the Legal Services Commission (LSC) over its plans to introduce tendering for very high cost cases (VHCCs).

Last week, Bindman & Partners, acting for the Law Society, sent a pre-action protocol for judicial review to the LSC about its decision to establish a panel of teams contracted to conduct VHCCs.

The LSC has since extended its consultation period regarding changes to the contract by two weeks to 25 May. The application process, due to begin next week when application packs were to be available on the LSC website, will now begin on 5 June and close on 27 July.

Bindmans is poised to prepare a judicial review claim and seek interim relief and abridgment of time if the LSC doesn’t respond by the end of this week.
The society wants the LSC to withdraw the scheme, carry out extra research, conduct a race equality impact assessment and carry out a “meaningful and informed” consultation with the profession and others.

It is basing its challenge

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