A pilot scheme should be set up to look at whether costs associated with complex litigation could be reined in through greater use of budgeting, a leading expert in the field has suggested.

Launching a Civil Justice Council (CJC) consultation on the issue, Professor John Peysner, chairman of its costs committee, said a trial could test the viability of the increasing judicial trend towards controlling costs to bring certainty and predictability to complex litigation.

The consultation paper examines the merits of both prospective and after-the-event budgeting, including cost capping.

It follows recent cases where judges have veered towards encouraging parties to stick as closely as possible to initial cost estimates and shown more of a willingness to cap costs in cases that are not group actions and where there are no exceptional circumstances.

Professor Peysner said the challenge was to control costs in a way that satisfies the needs of case management and does justice between the parties.

'Budgeting could well be a suitable pilot project for some complex multi-track cases in one or more courts,' he added.

Respondents are asked whether there should be a budgeting pilot, what this should address, and whether it should apply to all cases in the fast or multi-track.

Responses will form part of a consultative paper that will be submitted to the rules committee and the Department for Constitutional Affairs; the deadline is 7 May.

The paper is on the CJC Web site: www.civiljusticecouncil.gov.uk.

A Law Society spokesman predicted that budgeting would create more transparency.

'Costs budgeting is a practical way forward generally,' he said.

'We see it as one technique in the armoury of costs issues.

It is likely to be more appropriate for the larger cases in the multi-track, but we can see it having uses in complex fast-track matters.'

Paula Rohan