Concerns over whether Jackson should consider fixed fees for large cases

Concerns have been raised about whether Lord Justice Rupert Jackson's review into the high cost of civil litigation should apply to large-scale commercial disputes.

The Commercial Court Users Committee (CCUC), is questioning whether a one-size-fits-all approach to costs should be applied across the board in civil litigation.

The representative body, which has set up a sub-committee in response to Jackson's review, has raised concerns about whether potential procedural changes to litigation should apply to complex, multi-party disputes in the higher courts as well as to commoditised cases in the lower courts.

It is understood that the CCUC also thinks that looking at procedure in the commercial courts is unnecessary given that the post BCCI-Aikens' working party has only recently covered similar ground.

The Jackson review was launched in January by Master of the Rolls Sir Anthony Clarke (pictured) to look at the rules and principles governing the costs of civil litigation. It is set to publish a working paper for consultation on 8 May.

Jackson has considered introducing a system similar to that used in Germany, which would involve an agreement to cap costs for certain proportions of work throughout the case.

One litigator at a top 10 City firm said: "The lower courts are dealing with commoditised cases where it may be appropriate for a scale fees system. In the higher courts, where there are complex, multi-party disputes, court users are prepared to pay for a thorough service."

However, one top Chancery barrister countered: "It is not an adequate answer to say fixed fees work in the lower courts and not in the high courts. It is the higher costs in the higher courts that have been attracting negative attention. One size may not fit all but it might be appropriate to have one standard with discretion to depart from it."