Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

It was always obvious, from the time of the Woolf Report and reforms, that the frontloading of files was not going to be successful and, it was not going to relieve costs in the system. Bristol University had an interesting course on this, namely the history of the old CCR and the new CPR and the defects within it. It was obvious, that once the explosion in litigation took place, you would have, strong defendants playing around with the so-called pre-action protocol's and limitation periods, pleading satellite cases in costs and procedure, and generally, clogging up the system with this, and on the other hand, litigants in person simply "having a go".

For the sake of me saying "oh what a mess", it should be remembered, at the same time, as the Woolf Report, there was the Middleton Report on funding of legal advice in court, and court resources to process cases much more quickly through the same. This included, a suggestion, that all courts, should have proper inter-active computer systems and databases, to assist litigants and in particular, litigants in person.

Of course, the expense, was never going to be contemplated, and further, of course, it would have taken away, a lot of the work of more Junior pupil barristers, which was never going to happen, and the junior end of the bar as a whole.

It seems to me, that the system needs a full revision, back to the old position of the CCR, in which, there was simply a letter before action, disclosure by way of a county court or witness summons, including, the elements of the other sides file, or third-party file that one wanted by this process, and then witness statements, just before trial, with costs at County Court scheduled rates. I don't know why they change this, other than of course, it was the Blair new…… New………… New…… Shiny…… New…… Era.

About the only thing they got right, was powers for summary assessment of costs.

What an utter and despicable Fanny Adams of a mess, these so-called reforms have created.

Your details

Cancel