EGEDE ESTHER OSINACHI 1400547 esther.egede@buckingham.ac.uk LEGAL SKILLS AND PROCEDURES ESSAY FOR JULY 2014 ‘‘The Master of the Rolls instructed Lord Justice Jackson to ‘review the rules and principles governing the costs of civil litigation and to make recommendations in order to promote access to justice at proportionate cost’. How far and to what extent do you think the objectives of the civil justice review have been achieved?’’ The English Legal system is a common law system; its study applies to the powers, procedures and activities of the group of courts and statutory tribunals in England and Wales and the people who work in it. It is divided into the civil and criminal courts, and is responsible for the administration …show more content…
The objectives of the civil justice review and its content is a coherent package of interlocking reforms and recommendations aimed at controlling these costs which compared to the damages or debts at stake had become ridiculous. Furthermore, it recommended ways of promoting access to justice at a proportionate cost. It also required the reviewing of case management procedures; having regard to research into costs and funding; to consult widely and compare the British civil litigation costs regime with those of other jurisdictions; and to prepare a report setting out recommendations with supporting evidence. The primary costs recommendations are: recoverability of success fees and After The Event insurance premiums abolished, the general level of damages increased by 10%, introduction of the regime of qualified and one way cost shifting (QOCS), capping lawyers deduction for success fees to 25% of damages, banning purchasing of cases and payment of referral fees by lawyers, and moving to fixed costs in fast track personal injury cases. In considering the achievement of the objectives of the Jackson reforms, there has to be knowledge of the period before its introduction – the Woolf reform period- and its current state to see what impact it has had on the cost of litigation. The
This letter is to advise you that your tax appeal hearing is coming up on March 6, 2005 at 10:35 a.m. at the Office of the Tax Assessors of Lackawanna County. The office is located on the 5th floor of the County Office Building; 211 Ace Road, Clark, Pennsylvania 18111. Attorney Smith would like to remind you to arrive at the County Office Building at 10:25 a.m. with all of the pictures you have of the comparable houses in your area.
state prosecutor. (Lippman, 2007) The purpose of the civil action is to compensate you with
The courts have generally supported NHS decisions about rationing. Critically analyse this statement with reference to the judicial reviews of NHS decisions not to pay for a treatment.
The Plaintiff’s estate was sequestrated in Federal Magistrates Court on May 12 2009, for failure to pay Council court costs [10]. An application by the Plaintiff for an extension in time to appeal this sequestration was
Case Comment: John Michael Malins v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2017] EWHC 835 (Admin) 2017 WL 01339062
Tort reform has intense arguments to both sides and creates a myriad of concerns. On one side of the tort reform movement, defendants such as corporations and medical professionals want limits on the damages awarded to the plaintiff. The benefit of tort reform for defendant is the financial savings. However, a cap placed on medical malpractice cases and other cases that are of negligence would standardize the monetary compensation regardless of the damage. In my opinion, Medical malpractice tort reform is a gray area, for each breach of the standard of care involves a different story and person, therefore the damages vary and should be evaluated fairly. In this essay, both sides of the argument are discussed, with a focus on medical malpractice tort reform.
The conditional fee arrangement was introduced by the Access to Justice Act (AJA) 1999, as an attempt to transfer legal funding from the treasury to the private sector. This occurred as a result of an increasing and ridiculous growth in the cost of legal aid, namely from a few hundred million to well over 2.1 billion pounds from the 1980s to 2000. Moreover, it was not because demand was growing. Rather, number of cases relying on legal aid had decreased. Due to the need to control budget, Conditional fee arrangements are used to fund many civil cases which legal aid now excludes, and the issues brought about by conditional fee arrangements have been debated over the last decade. The conditional fee arrangements are sometime known as ‘no
However, not all cases receive the luxury we call justice. Many cases have been turned over and neglected, leaving individuals who patiently await their trial date deprived of justice. Injustice in the judicial system has been an apparent problem for decades. Every case has to be viewed in an unbiased perspective with a sufficient amount of evidence. If these conditions are not met, the possibility for injustice increases drastically.
Tarr, G. A. (2014). Judicial Process and Judicial Policymaking, 6th Edition. [MBS Direct]. Retrieved from
The Great Chief Justice: John Marshall and the Rule of Law by Charles F. Hobson examines the judicial career of John Marshall, as well as the legal culture that helped to shape his political beliefs and his major constitutional opinions. The author sources much of his information from the formal opinions that Marshall issued during his judicial career. From these writings, Hobson presents Marshall 's views on law and government and provides explanations for what in Marshall 's life influenced those beliefs.
This paper aims to explore the Legal Services Act 2007 and the impact the Act has had on the role of a Costs Lawyer since implementation.
Judicial precedent refers to the sources of law where past decisions made by judges create law for future judges to follow. An example would be the Donoghue vs Stevenson case, where Stevenson had bought ginger beer, and Donoghue had drank it after their been a decomposed snail in it, however their was no charge because she was not in a contract with
Equity has been described as a ‘mysterious creature’ that lies distinctly alongside the common law. In considering the statement, there is an almost linear reversal in which the remedies in equity procure a type of right not necessarily available in the common law. This peculiar jurisdiction has created consistent controversy especially in regards to the fusion of the common law and equity. To understand further, this essay will consider the relationship between equity and the common law. The development of equity alongside the common law through its history and intention, and application in case law will be imperative in the discussion of the statement. In conjunction with an analysis of fusion, it will become apparent that equitable damages were enlivened, separate to, in unfair circumstances where no rights/damages existed within the common law. In trying to tread the murky waters of the distinction yet the procedural fusion of equity and common law, the contention of this essay becomes apparent. Effectively, this essay aims to highlight that the history, intention, application and fusion fallacies regarding equity, all which point to an assertion that rights in equity are indeed the product of its remedies. Whether they are merely ‘two streams of jurisdiction, though they run in the same channel, run side by side and do not mingle their waters’, is yet to be seen.
To determine whether the current Civil Justice System of England and Wales is adequate in delivering access to justice, it is necessary to look at the system prior to the Woolf reforms, the implementations made by the Woolf reforms and the implementations made by the Jackson reforms.
The reformation of the civil justice system in 1998 was as result of the issues identified by Lord Woolf as hindrances to effective civil litigation. Prior to Woolf report, it was perceived that civil litigation has two main problems; cost of litigation and the duration of court proceedings. The effect of the enquiry and the report thereafter, created new system of litigation where parties are encouraged to settle dispute without a formal court proceeding. The process of taking a civil case to court is now governed by the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) which came into force in 1999. The enactment of this Act and other Acts of Parliament enacted earlier such as the Arbitration Act, Limitation Act 1980 and Access to Justice Act 1999 has played