Lord Justice Jackson to head civil costs review

4 November 2008

Lord Justice Jackson, formerly judge in charge of the technology and construction court, has been chosen by the Master of the Rolls Sir Anthony Clarke to head a fundamental review into civil costs.

The review, which begins in January, is the judiciary’s response to the failure of the Woolf reforms to control the cost of civil justice. The findings are due to be presented to the Master of the Rolls by the end of the year.

A judicial communications office spokesman said Lord Justice Jackson would carry out an independent review of the rules and principles governing civil litigation to promote access to justice “at proportionate cost.”

The spokesman said he would compare the costs regime in England and Wales with that of other countries, and take into account research being carried out for the government into conditional fees.

Immediately after the announcement, justice minister Bridget Prentice issued a statement saying: “I would like to make clear that the review is not intended to, and will not, delay progress on the various specific initiatives that are currently being taken forward on civil costs.

“Nor will the fact that a fundamental review is underway prevent implementation of any reforms of the costs system that might be appropriate.”

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said the first phase of research into conditional fees by three professors - Richard Moorhead of Cardiff law school, Paul Fenn of Nottingham University and Neil Rickman of Surrey University - was completed last month.

“We are currently considering the report to determine the next steps,” he said.

Justice secretary Jack Straw condemned “scandalous” conditional fee lawyers at the Labour conference in September, and promised to consider imposing stricter limits on lawyers’ success fees.

David McIntosh, chairman of the City of London Law Society and consultant at Fox, welcomed the review.

“There has been so much satellite litigation over costs and debate about the lack of proportionality,” he said.

“The Woolf reforms have backfired. Under the Woolf-inspired protocols, so much of the work has to be done up front that a great deal of the costs occur on day one.

“In the old days claims could be run on a shoe-string and settle without massive preparation for trial.

McIntosh said courts needed to take a more commercial approach to the issue of costs, limiting discovery and preventing fishing expeditions.

“It’s a great shame that Woolf did not lead to closer supervision of the parties.

“No case can now be settled cheaply, because of the hoops the claimants’ solicitors have to jump through before cases go to court.”