header-logo header-logo

04 February 2014
Issue: 7593 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Court fees rise will hurt business

LSLA issues warning over 12-fold hike in commercial court fees

Senior business lawyers have issued a stern warning about Ministry of Justice (MoJ) proposals to hike fees nearly 12-fold in commercial courts.

The London Solicitors Litigation Association (LSLA) say the increase would jeopardise the ability of small and medium sized businesses to pursue bad debts or settle contract disputes. They say the impact of the proposals has been made worse by the additional upfront costs arising from the Jackson reforms—skewing the costs-benefit balance so that companies will be more likely to write off losses than seek redress.

The MoJ recently proposed that civil and commercial courts become self-financing with extra money raised from commercial cases to subsidise family court costs.

In its consultation, Court Fees: Proposals for Reform, it suggests the issue fee for a £400,000 commercial claim in the Rolls Building, currently £1,670, should rise to £20,000. 

However, the LSLA opposes the rise and has argued that fees should be high enough to deter time-wasters but low enough not to be a barrier. It is concerned that “by viewing high value international commercial litigation conducted in London as a cash cow to be milked at will, the MoJ will drive work into the arms of competitor jurisdictions such as New York and Singapore”.

LSLA President Francesca Kaye says: “No one should be priced out of civil litigation from the outset.

“All but the biggest UK businesses would suffer if these increased charges are driven through. Charges would be the same for multi-million pound claims as for the lower value claims that individuals or SMEs might make, weighting the system heavily in favour of multinationals but penalising the businesses which are the lifeblood of our economy.

“The last thing SMEs need is more risk. Neither this nor ramping up fees for international cases make commercial sense for government or business. The courts play a vital role in the economy and should be enabled to be effective.” 

The LSLA also opposes the idea that business court users should subsidise other court users. Kaye says: “It seems inconsistent to increase fees in the civil courts but standardise, or even reduce, fees in other areas."

 

Issue: 7593 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll