In February 2013, The Chancellor of the High Court announced a review of the practice and procedure of the Chancery Division. Consultees were asked to comment on:
- the current practices and procedures for the conduct of business in the Chancery Division, bearing in mind the changes then about to be implemented following the Jackson Report;
- whether current case management procedures best serve the needs of court users and, if not, proposals for change;
- whether the current basis for allocation of judicial resources makes the best use of the available skills and experience available and, if not, proposals for change; and
- recommendations to secure the best access to justice for litigants in person.
Following an initial period of consultation, a provisional report by Briggs LJ was published on 30 July 2013. Although it recognises that the Chancery Division provides a high quality service to its users, the report makes over 100 recommendations, including:
- The provision of modern IT.
- Better access to justice for litigants in person, including a designated counter service in the Rolls Building.
- Common divisional management of the Chancery Division, the Commercial Court and the Technology and Construction Court.
- Case management to focus on dispute resolution, rather than preparation for trial.
- More docketing and case management by judges.
- A fixed time period for trials and a four-day-trial week, to leave Fridays free for case management hearings.
- The transfer of cases issued in London to the regional trial centres.
The report can be accessed here. The further consultation period closes on 31 October 2013, with a final report expected by the end of December 2013.
Please click on the links below for the other articles in the commercial litigation newsletter
- Jackson update
- Hot-tub: lessons from Australia
- The importance of clarity when it comes to the terms of, and costs associated with, settlement
- Third party funder entitled to terminate funding agreement
- Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses valid as a matter of English law
- Service: retrospective validation of the claim form permitted and receipt by fax sufficient for French courts to be seised
- Disclosure and privilege update: increasing transparency and guidance on the dominant purpose test
- Can the corporate veil ever be pierced?
- Part 36: valid acceptance and "near-miss" offers
- CPR 66th update
- Collective actions update: "opt-out" coming to a competition claim near you
- Judicial Review: reforms made and more to come
- Courts to become self-financing?
Keep up to date
Sign up to receive the latest legal developments, insights and news from Ashurst. By signing up, you agree to receive commercial messages from us. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Sign upThe information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to.
Readers should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.