Litigants in person

Reforms to open justice mean parties will need to be proactive, writes Antonia Glover

Antonia Glover of Quinn Emanuel outlines sweeping transparency reforms following the work of the Transparency and Open Justice Board in this week's NLJ

Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ

Rather than automatically discrediting AI-generated content, the sector—including the judiciary—needs better AI literacy, argues Dr Alan Ma

MPs have launched an inquiry into access to justice, including the potential for an ‘access to justice fund levy’

Taking the recent heatwave in his stride, Ian Smith (not pictured) introduces the Magnificent Six

In this month’s brief, Ian Smith pays tribute to a titan of industrial relations & applauds the brevity of judgments in days gone by

In days gone by, judges wrote shorter judgments, barrister Ian Smith, emeritus professor of employment law at the Norwich Law School, UEA, writes in his latest employment law update for NLJ. Surely, they can’t have more time on their hands now?

The complexities of costs proceedings can be a minefield for litigants in person. But the courts expect compliance with the rules, writes Julian Caddick

A recent case illustrates the financial risks facing litigants in person (LiPs) who fail to comply with the correct procedure on costs. Julian Caddick, council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers and a partner and head of costs at Thompsons Solicitors, explains the case in this week’s NLJ, and offers key takeaways for practitioners who find themselves opposite a LiP.