Beware the Overriding Objective

Dominic Regan calls attention to the revised CPR 1 in his latest opinion piece for the New Law Journal, 'Beware the Overriding Objective'.

The threat of a harsher approach to those seeking relief from sanctions under the new CPR3.9 is predicated upon the wording of the guidance within the Rule. There are now but two explicit considerations, namely:

• the need to deal with cases promptly and at proportionate cost, coupled with;
• the necessity for Court Orders, Rules and Directions to be obeyed.

It is yet to be determined whether proportionality might make inroads into and possibly dilute indemnity costs. There is no proportionality test applicable to such costs hence their attraction. Yet now the governing principle is that matters be dealt with at proportionate cost. The potential conflict is evident.

Professor Dominic Regan is a professor at City Law School columnist for the New Law Journal. He has assisted Lord Justice Jackson & HH Judge Simon Brown QC with costs reform and writes the blog Professor Dominic Regan. The full article was first published in the New Law Journal on 22 July 2013.