<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Civil Justice Blog &#187; Uncategorized</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&#038;cat=1" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org</link>
	<description>Current issues in civil justice in the UK and around the World</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:50:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Ambulance chasing or innovation?</title>
		<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=186</link>
		<comments>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=186#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:50:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Moorhead</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=186</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A nice little story in the Lawyer about iphone gadgets being used as a marketing tool (and possibly as a client adviser interface):
According to the Lawyer:
The Car Incident Assistant application gives accident victims the ability to get instant advice from the wreck of a crash, including access to a lawyer over the phone via a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&amp;p=186</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Surreptitious obtaining of evidence</title>
		<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=181</link>
		<comments>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=181#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:39:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Moorhead</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An interesting story in today&#8217;s Times in relation to Celebrity Chef Marco Pierre White&#8217;s divorce case, which deals with the legality of surreptitious obtaining of evidence and the potential exposure of practitioners to actions in tort which may have some relevance in civil proceedings. It also raises professional ethics issues.
Mr White has taken proceedings against [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&amp;p=181</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Litigation in Social Context: Costs, Funding and Roles</title>
		<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=178</link>
		<comments>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=178#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:56:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Moorhead</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=178</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This paper by Stephen B. Burbank[1], University  of Pennsylvania was given at the Oxford Centre for Socio-legal Studies conference on litigation funding in the Summer.  The Centre have been attempting a comparative exercise in looking at the costs of litigation across civil justice systems worldwide.
Discussions about the roles of litigation outside of the United [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&amp;p=178</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How the twittering stops&#8230;?</title>
		<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=176</link>
		<comments>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=176#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:08:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Moorhead</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=176</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Times is reporting that the High Court has issued a Writ via social networking site Twitter.
Given the nature of the site in question, it seemed appropriate to keep this post short!
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&amp;p=176</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A revolution for Scottish civil justice?</title>
		<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=173</link>
		<comments>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=173#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 10:24:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Moorhead</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=173</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lord Gill&#8217;s eagerly awaited review of the Scottish civil justice system has just been published.  Recommendations include:

specialist sheriffs  in solemn crime, general civil, personal injury, family and commercial;
a dramatic increase in the exclusive jurisdiction of the sheriff court from its current level of £5,000 to £150,000;
a specialist personal injury court;
a docket system in the Court [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&amp;p=173</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Collective Actions</title>
		<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=169</link>
		<comments>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=169#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:34:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Moorhead</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=169</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Government rejects CJC plea for generic right to bring collective actions.
The government has recently published a rather slender response to the CJC&#8217;s report Improving Access to Justice through Collective Actions.  It rejects the central recommendation that there should be a generic right of collective action applicable to any type of civil law claim.   With the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&amp;p=169</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Welcome&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=150</link>
		<comments>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=150#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:42:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Moorhead</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=150</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8230;to the Civil Justice Blog, a site designed to share information and debate civil justice in the UK and around the World.
The blog has moved from its original site to a bespoke webaddress here at www.civiljusticeblog.org.  Existing readers please update your RSS feeds and bookmarks.  New readers and commentators welcome!
You can read more about the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&amp;p=150</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Contingency Fees to be regulated&#8230;?</title>
		<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=114</link>
		<comments>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=114#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:52:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Moorhead</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Contingency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Costs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[no win no fee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contingency fees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawyers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://civiljustice.wordpress.com/?p=114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The government is consulting on regulating the current use of &#8216;damage based agreements&#8217; (contingency fees) for consumer protection purposes. The three areas in which they are considering regulation are:

the provision of clear and transparent information to consumers under DBAs, on all costs and expenses and alternative methods of funding;
regulating  a maximum % of the damages [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&amp;p=114</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Witness Statements</title>
		<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=98</link>
		<comments>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=98#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:13:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Moorhead</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Costs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jackson Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawyers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal costs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://civiljustice.wordpress.com/?p=98</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The requirements to exchange witness statements and the norm that they should stand as evidence I chief comes in for some critique, partly for reasons other than costs (there is speculation they may be associated with witness ‘training’ (coaching), para. 3.9, page 404) but partly because cases often settle after witness statements are prepared but [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&amp;p=98</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Disclosure</title>
		<link>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=93</link>
		<comments>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?p=93#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:55:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Moorhead</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://civiljustice.wordpress.com/?p=93</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Disclosure
There is an interesting debate shaping up about disclosure.  One of the key points is that if you want to reduce legal costs you have to reduce what lawyers actually do on cases.  You can do this by attacking the total costs charged (e.g. by having fixed costs and leaving it to the lawyers to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civiljusticeblog.org/?feed=rss2&amp;p=93</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
