Responding to today’s Supreme Court judgment in Coventry v Lawrence, the Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL) says:
The ‘flaws’ in the pre-Jackson CFA regime identified in the judgment – and by Sir Rupert Jackson – have now been fully aired by the highest court in the land. The ‘costs wars’ generated by that regime – with which we are all familiar – arguably took up a disproportionate amount of the courts’ time, energy and resources.
The majority judgment has now consigned such arguments to history although it is – again arguably – to be regretted that further argument as to ‘legitimate expectation’ will not now be aired.
Interestingly, at paragraph 48 of the judgment, the court has identified three alternative methods (other than LASPO) which could have been adopted in order to achieve the government’s aims and which may have given a fairer balance between receiving and paying parties’ interests.
The Association welcomes the clarity of the Court’s reasoning which is in line with our own submissions and which means that decided and settled cases will not now need revisiting. It will also enable cases to which the ‘old’ regime applies to be determined.
ACL was one of the interveners in this case.
For further information, please contact: Kerry Jack, Black Letter Communications
Tel: 020 3567 1208, email@example.com
Notes to editors:
Association of Costs Lawyers
The Association of Costs Lawyers (ACL) is a membership body representing and promoting the status and interests of Cost Lawyers in England and Wales. Founded in 1977, the Association was granted authorised body status in 2007 and is a front-line regulator, able to authorise its members to undertake the reserved legal activities of litigation and advocacy. In recognition of this new-found status, ACL changed its name from the Association of Law Costs Draftsmen in 2011. Costs Lawyers are regulated by the Costs Lawyer Standards Board.www.costslawyer.co.uk