 As a result of the procedural changes , including the Bill of Middlesex , the King 's Bench 's business rose tenfold between 1560 and 1640 . The simplicity and low cost of this procedure drove much business to the King 's Bench , which had a negative impact on the Court of Common Pleas and Court of Chancery . Historically , cases now covered by the Bill of Middlesex had been handled by the Common Pleas , using a specialist writ drafted by the Chancery . This writ was very expensive , and as such brought large amounts of revenue to the Chancery and the Common Pleas . Costs varied depending on the amount of money being claimed from the defendant ; it was 6 shillings and 8 pence to claim £ 40 , 10 shillings for £ 100 , and £ 5 for £ 1 @,@ 000 . In return , the Chancery began to bring injunctions against those who claimed Bills of Middlesex , " whereby [ the judges ] are hindered of their fine which should have been paid in [ the Chancery ] upon the original of the said case " . These injunctions were only temporary ; " once the fine had been paid there was nothing to prevent a continuation of proceedings in King ’ s Bench " . Relatively few injunctions were issued , and thanks to technical loopholes " it was a weapon too infrequently used , and too easily parried " to have any long @-@ term impact . The issuing of injunctions finally ended in 1590 , after an ordinance passed by James I increased the costs of King 's Bench proceedings . The Bill of Middlesex itself was finally abolished by the Uniformity of Process Act 1832 . 
