The free guide to costs, funding and the Jackson reforms
Jackson reforms
Government accepts Jackson’s call for CJC to seek industry agreement on low-value clin neg claims
The government has accepted Lord Justice Jackson’s recommendation that the Civil Justice Council be tasked with negotiating a new bespoke process and fixed costs regime for low-value clinical negligence claims, it emerged yesterday.
Regan: £250,000 threshold for High Court cases on the way
The senior judiciary is making progress towards introducing a £250,000 threshold for cases that are eligible to be heard in the High Court, Professor Dominic Regan has claimed. However, there are contradictory views on the enthusiasm of the Ministry of Justice for Lord Justice Jackson’s proposed extension of fixed recoverable costs.
Jackson: Most of the problems behind excessive costs are “sorted” or improving
Lord Justice Jackson said yesterday that 10 of the 16 causes of excessive costs in civil litigation he identified eight years ago have been eliminated or are on the way to elimination. He said that despite “grumbling” from lawyers and “harsh words directed mainly at me”, ignorance of the costs rules in the legal profession was “sorted”.
Guarded welcome for Jackson’s fixed-cost plans
Lawyers have responded positively to Lord Justice Jackson’s report on fixed costs, while expressing relief that he had modified his initial idea of imposing a grid on all cases worth up to £250,000. However, concerns remain about how the plans will operate.
Jackson lays out vision of fixed costs for some cases up to £250,000
Lord Justice Jackson has today put forward his vision for extending fixed recoverable costs (FRC), but said he has not gone as far as originally envisaged because of improvements made in costs management. He proposed “finishing the job” of introducing FRC for all fast-track cases, as well as a new ‘intermediate’ track for certain claims up to £100,000, and a voluntary pilot of a ‘capped costs’ regime for business and property cases up to £250,000.
Rule committee decides against revisiting budgeting limit for PI cases despite discount rate impact
The Civil Procedure Rule Committee has decided against changing the financial threshold for costs budgeting in high-value personal injury cases, despite the prospect of the new discount rate taking a significant number of claims out of the regime.
Neuberger indicates support for contingent legal aid fund
The president of the Supreme Court has indicated his support for some form of contingent legal aid fund (CLAF), using third-party litigation funders as a model. The idea of the CLAF has been debated for decades and is currently being examined by a working party, set up at the urging of Lord Justice Jackson.
Jackson to pilot £80,000 costs cap for some cases worth up to £250,000
The work on extending fixed recoverable costs is going to start with a pilot to test capping costs at £80,000 for claims up to £250,000 in a limited number of courts, it has emerged. The voluntary pilot – which will see caps set for stages as well as the overall cap – will run for two years.
Rule committee should look at gap in QOCS exception, says High Court judge
The Civil Procedure Rule Committee may need to address a hole in the exception from qualified one-way costs-shifting (QOCS) that meant defendants in a personal injury claim could not seek their costs because service of the claim had been set aside, rather than struck out, a High Court judge has ruled.
Exclusive: Jackson “moving away” from £250,000 upper limit for fixed-cost cases
A widespread consensus has emerged that Lord Justice Jackson is backing away from extending fixed recoverable costs to cases worth up to £250,000, Litigation Futures can report – although what level he is now looking at is unknown.
Blog
Hands up who knows what litigation financiers sell?
If your answer was ‘money’, you would be correct but sadly out of step with the prevailing thinking. If, however, you asked some other litigation financiers the same question, you would very likely receive answers like ‘project management skills’, or ‘an experienced litigation partner’. Whilst none of these answers are wrong per se, they do rather miss the point of why lawyers and clients engage with funders. Experienced and successful litigators do not want the views of litigation financiers on how to project manage their litigation – they want access to their cash pure and simple.
October 19th, 2017
Associate News
FCA regulation for litigation funders – it should be the law
ATE insurance in action – successful £5m professional negligence judgment for ‘Giambrone’ claimants
ATE Market Instability
Phoenix Legal benefits from smoother case progression with Eclipse Compact, the legal software solution for small law firms
Featured Associate
ARAG |
 |
Featured Associate
John M Hayes |
 |
