Report comment

I absolutely disagree with anyone who disagrees with the Jackson Reforms. Rules are there to be obeyed and lawyers, both solicitors and barristers, have to understand that the CPR were put in place for a reason, this being to widen access to justice and to cut back on excessive costs.

Working in the legal world and seeing all to many dubious lawyers getting away with breath taking breaches of the rules (very bad letters before claim produced to scare defendants into coughing up, witness statements deliberately entered late) on all too many an occasion, I welcome the ruthless severity of the present regime and hope that it finally puts some of those dubious lawyers firmly out of practice (you may have gathered that I regard Re: Fons HF and Re: Mitchell as superb judgments).

Lawyers of both streams have to stop being afraid of obeying the rules and realise that firm obediance of the CPR was intended from the start and that indulgence from the Courts of bad practice can not be allowed any more.