 |
| LATEST LATEST LEGAL NEWS ARCHIVE |
LATEST NEWS & EVENTS Charity challenges MoJ on Jackson litigation and dispute resolution reforms  A charity is launching a challenge to the way the government is implementing Lord Justice Jackson's proposals on reforming civil litigation and dispute resolution costs. In a letter sent to the justice secretary Ken Clarke, the Public Law Project (PLP) calls into question the way in which the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has handled the proposals. Central to the plans are Lord Jackson's recommendations to abolish the recoverability of Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA) success fees. The charity said it does not object in principle to such a move provided that it is introduced in conjunction with the balancing factors recommended in the review. In personal injury claim cases, the MoJ proposes to introduce cost protection for less wealthy claimants to balance the effect of the decision to abolish recoverability of CFA success fees. However, the MoJ has decided not to introduce this measure in judicial review. According to the charity, this means that the government and other state bodies can recover costs from an unsuccessful claimant. Diane Astin, director of PLP, said: "The proposed changes are likely to have a seriously detrimental effect on the ability of individuals and groups to challenge unlawful conduct by public bodies." Neil Stewart, dispute resolution partner at Lamport Bassitt, said the PLP's critcism of the MoJ is "misplaced". He explained: "Judicial review is a notoriously inefficient process, despite the early 'weeding out' stage where obviously hopeless applications are refused permission to continue. "In 2009 there were over 9,000 applications for judicial review and just under 200 were successful. That is a success rate of just over two per cent. In a large proportion of those 9,000 odd cases public money was expended in defending the applications." He continued: "The PLP would like all claimants to be immune from the costs consequences of making an unsuccessful judicial review application. Many of them are already immune because they are on legal aid (more public money) so no costs order can be made against them if they lose, whereas the public body has no such immunity if the applicant succeeds. "If the PLP have their way, applicants who are not on legal aid will also be immune and judicial review is consequently likely to become more popular, resulting in even more of the taxpayers' cash being poured down the drain. In proposing to maintain the status quo, the MoJ is taking a balanced approach." Posted by Alex McLean 
Related Articles: 11/5/2012 - Queen's Speech legal reforms welcomed 17/4/2012 - Further regulation to encourage family mediation: justice minster 2/4/2012 - Fuel tanker driver dispute talks scheduled for Wednesday 23/3/2012 - Landowners urged to take more responsibility for falling trees 22/3/2012 - Justice reforms move a step closer More Dispute Resolution News |
|||
| © 2012 Lamport Bassitt | DEFAULT ZOOM | DISABILITY INFORMATION | LEGAL INFORMATION |