The beginning of the end?

Lord Neuberger’s speech at the Association of Costs Lawyers’ Annual Conference 2012 finished with the warning:

“the Jackson reforms represent the boldest attempt to cure our costs problem yet attempted. Should they fail to reduce costs, it seems to me that we will face a stark choice: the rejection of the English costs rule and the adoption of either a US-style costs rule or a German-style fixed costs regime.”

Is the spectacularly botched implementation of the Jackson reforms a cunning way to guarantee this outcome?

7 thoughts on “The beginning of the end?

  1. I have to admit, I left the ACL conference last year feeling worried, it was the first conference that I’ve attended where everyone was positive about the future for costs, maybe a bad sign.
    In previous years it was doom and gloom and that didn’t come to fruition until maybe now!

  2. I say bring it on: the reality is that the penny pinching, greedy and morally questionable paying parties in this jurisdiction will keep ‘creative’ costs professionals in employment for the foreseeable future. If there was a nuclear bomb the only things that would survive would be rats, lawyers and costs muppets. Stick that in your pipe Neuberger!!

  3. Truly Eminent, I agree, whilst I wouldn’t exactly say I was comfortable with the reforms, I cannot see all work just disappearing, loop holes will be found etc, and those who are creative and do provide a good service will continue to do so.

  4. in my humble view, the people whom should fear the most, are the defendant negotiators, whom by and large have no actual expertise or experience in billing, file content or assessment, living largely off of pre-set formulas and scripts for reductions
    how sad they become the victims of “friendly fire” from the Insurers they have worked for……

  5. I accept and agree that the implementation of the reforms has been (specatularly) botched – but let’s give it all a chance and TRY to make the system work as it is (was) intended. The alternative has been laid out!

    My own view is that costs management – IF it works as intended – is a ‘good thing’ for ALL ‘stakeholders’ (I really hate that term but can’t come up with a better one at the moment!). Both sides will have a better idea of their likely income/liabilities, clients will have more certainty than they have at the moment – and those of us with real costs knowledgte, expertise and experience will find ourselves properly valued as part of the litigation process.

  6. Sue, good sentiments, but slightly undermined I feel when you consider the pittance the rules provide for in terms of what will be paid for anyone complying with the Costs Management PD – if we are to be “properly valued”, it would seem not in monetary terms for the work necessary :/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>