“Enforcing Compliance”: The Stricter Sanctions Regime Post-Jackson - Monika Sobiecki, Pump Court Chambers
17/11/13. Much ink has been spilled on the subject of the Jackson reforms to civil litigation, which came into effect on 1 April 2013. The major focus of attention has been on the dramatically shifting landscape of litigation funding and the introduction of the costs management procedure in multi-track cases. However, Jackson also introduced one further set of reforms which, despite the fact they have the potential to be radical and far-reaching, have been quietly ushered in and seem to have largely passed under the radar of the legal press. These are the proposed reforms to the Civil Procedure Rules – particularly changes to the overriding objective and the procedure for applying for relief from sanctions under CPR 3.9. This article aims to ensure that what may be an important procedural alteration and change in emphasis is not neglected by practitioners!
Image ©iStockphoto.com/sellingoutstieglitz
![Appeal judge rules that credit hire company has no costs liability following a finding of fundamental dishonesty in personal injury case: RSA v. Fastrack Solutions Limited [2023] 4 WLUK 92 - David Bowden, Erimus Chambers](/content/images/resized/images/stories/carkeys_72_72.jpg)
