Jackson to review complex commercial disputes
Large-scale commercial disputes will come under the remit of Lord Justice Rupert Jackson's review into the high cost of civil litigation, Jackson said today. Jackson's 650-page preliminary report issued earlier today warns that the commercial courts are not a 'sacred territory' and that his findings will still apply to complex commercial cases.The news comes despite earlier 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.
May 08, 2009 at 11:46 AM
3 minute read
Large-scale commercial disputes will come under the remit of Lord Justice Rupert Jackson's review into the high cost of civil litigation, Jackson said today.
Jackson's 650-page preliminary report issued earlier today warns that the commercial courts are not a 'sacred territory' and that his findings will still apply to complex commercial cases.
The news comes despite earlier concerns about whether potential procedural changes to litigation should apply to complex, multi-party disputes in the higher courts as well as to cases in the lower courts.
Jackson states in the report: "I have come to the conclusion that the Commercial Court is not a sacred territory, which falls outside the terms of reference set for me by the Master of the Rolls."
He continued: "The recommendations in my final report must encompass all civil courts, including the Commercial Court."
However, Jackson did concede that 'one size does not fit all' and he plans to liaise with commercial court judges and practitioners on the applicability of any of his proposals during the consultation period on his report, due to end in the summer.
Mayer Brown London head of litigation David Allen said: "This report is a laudable attempt to grapple with the difficult issue of litigation costs. However, this is not an area where a one size fits all approach will work, as is helpfully acknowledged in the report."
He added: "Large, complex cases are expensive and therefore require a different approach, but there is already a vast array of case management machinery available to judges. Ultimately, however many new rules are introduced, it always comes back to the judge's ability to manage a case effectively. This is not to encourage complacency but to recognise that we have a system that works well in higher value complex cases."
Jackson's wide-scale review, which was launched in January by Master of the Rolls Sir Anthony Clarke, looked at a broad range of issues affecting costs and procedures in the courts.
In today's preliminary report Jackson suggested it is unlikely that fixed costs will be introduced in high value litigation. He also said that the cost-shifting rule – which sees the loser pay the other side's legal costs – could be scrapped for class actions.
CMS Cameron McKenna head of dispute resolution Liam O'Connell commented: "Lord Justice Jackson tentatively suggests that elements of US-style class actions be adopted in England, where the claimants do not face the risk of having to pay the defendant's costs. This could lead to a surge in class actions, as the barriers to entry into the litigation field will be lower."
The consultation period will end on 31 July when Jackson will review all feedback. A final report is due in December.
David Greene (pictured above), the president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, said: "Jackson's preliminary report not only reflects the research that has been undertaken but also preliminary views which will have a marked effect on the litigation process. This is a work that could start a revolution of our litigation system equal to that started by Lord Woolf 10 years ago. We look forward to responding to it in the next stage."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBaker & Partners, LCWP Lead on $1B Fraud Claim by Malaysia's 1MDB Against Amicorp
Apple Subsidiaries in Belgium and France Sued by DRC Over Conflict Minerals
2 minute readBaker McKenzie, Norton Rose & Other Top Litigators Foresee Rise in AI, Data & ESG Disputes
Freshfields Takes on Syria's Brutal Legacy, But Will Victims Ever See Compensation?
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250