homepage

News Release


14 January 2010

02/10

JACKSON REVIEW CALLS FOR A PACKAGE OF REFORMS TO REIN IN THE COSTS OF CIVIL JUSTICE

 

Lord Justice (Rupert) Jackson today published the final report to the Master of the Rolls, Lord Neuberger, on his year-long, comprehensive review of civil litigation costs.   His proposals include a wide-ranging package of reforms designed to bring costs under control and make them fairer.

The Jackson review was set up in late 2008 by the then Master of the Rolls, Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony, because the senior judiciary were - and are - concerned about the escalating costs of civil justice.  Those costs are often disproportionate to the issues, in particular the sums at stake.

The report - the first ever fundamental review, specifically focused upon civil costs - sets out a coherent package of interlocking reforms, which are designed to reduce litigation costs and to promote access to justice.

In the course of his review Sir Rupert consulted extensively.  His final report takes into account the wide range of views expressed during his two consultation periods (January-February and May-July 2009). 

In addition to making for a more effective legal and court system (controlling excesses of litigation and fees), the report’s recommendations have the potential – if implemented in full – to yield substantial savings in legal costs for the taxpayer.

However, his recommendations are designed to ensure that overall members of the general public seeking justice do not lose out financially.    The majority of personal injury claimants will end up with more compensation under Sir Rupert’s proposals.

The final report covers 45 subject areas and runs to 557 pages, with recommendations across the whole spectrum of civil litigation.

Sir Rupert’s key findings and recommendations include:

The reforms provide a framework whereby parties could enter into litigation with greater certainty about the costs involved. 

They would also assist in allowing for some claims to be resolved earlier with greater use of mediation.

The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, welcomed the report:  “The judiciary has been concerned for some time that the costs of civil litigation are disproportionate and excessive. 

"Lord Justice Jackson’s fundamental review addresses these questions head on.  I am extremely grateful to him for the enormous work and effort that he has brought to bear on this important, complex issue and for proposals which for the first time address the issue of costs as a comprehensive, coherent whole.

"I look forward to the senior judiciary working with the Ministry of Justice to implement Sir Rupert’s coherent package of interlocking reforms, designed to reduce litigation costs and enhance access to justice in the courts.”

The Master of the Rolls, Lord Neuberger, also welcomed Sir Rupert’s report:   “Lord Justice Jackson’s report on civil costs is a magnificent achievement.  Everyone, not just judges and lawyers, have every reason to be grateful to him and his team.  I would like to thank Rupert and his team publicly today for a report on an important topic which urgently needs reform.

"The report is clear and comprehensive in its coverage, thorough and fair in its discussions, and imaginative and realistic in its proposals.

"The measures the report proposes will ensure that legal costs are reduced, and that civil justice will be more efficient and fairer. All interested parties have been fully consulted and their views have been reported and considered.

"The time for discussion and debate is over: it is now time for action. I hope that the Ministry of Justice will give these proposals the same enthusiastic and practical support which the Judges will give them.

"I am happy to say that Lord Justice Jackson has agreed to play a leading part in bringing his excellent proposals into effect, and I will ensure that he receives all the support that I can muster.”

Lord Justice Jackson paid tribute to the assessors and staff who have assisted him in his year-long review, and the large body of judges, lawyers and other professionals and court users who have contributed their evidence, experience and views to the review process.

He emphasised that the report’s conclusions and recommendations were his own.

Notes for Editors

Ends