header-logo header-logo

18 October 2007
Issue: 7293 / Categories: Legal News , E-disclosure
printer mail-detail

Lawyers unhappy on e-disclosure rules

News

There are widespread concerns among litigators about ambiguity in the e-disclosure rules, a new survey reveals.

The study by Ipsos Mori for KPMG Forensic, shows 48 of the 100 UK litigators asked believe that judges and masters are ill-equipped to make e-disclosure case management decisions and should be trained on the difficulties routinely faced in an e-disclosure exercise.
Sixty-eight per cent also support the establishment of an independent body of industry practitioners to promote best practice and training in dealing with the disclosure of electronic documents.

Guidelines on e-disclosure were introduced into the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) two years ago, yet only 17% of lawyers believe they have had a positive impact. Nearly half (43%) believe they have not and 56% believe they have made litigation more costly. The survey shows that 48% cases cost £500,000 or more, with 26% costing over £1m.

KPMG Forensic says costs could be reduced if the two sides  met earlier, as the CPR suggest. In fact, 39% say they had never met their opponent to discuss it and of those that had met, in 29% of cases it was not until, or after, the case management conference.

Paul Tombleson, head of forensic technology at KPMG Forensic, says: “E-disclosure can be immensely complex and costly, and litigators have called for renewed energy in agreeing clearer case management guidelines.”

Issue: 7293 / Categories: Legal News , E-disclosure
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
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
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
back-to-top-scroll