DEVELOPMENTS SINCE DENTON: ALL THE POSTS AND CASES IN ONE PLACE

We are now exactly one year on since Mitchell and 237 days since Denton. This is a good a time as any to review the Post Denton decisions on this blog. It is interesting that there were no reports in September but that the number of cases have started to increase again (they were almost twice daily in the wake of Mitchell). This post has been updated to January 2015.

THE SUBMISSIONS IN DENTON

The submissions in relation to each case are on this blog.

Denton -v- White

Decadent Vapours

Utilise -v- Davis

The Bar Council and Law Society submissions

DENTON ITSELF

• Breaking News and Link to Judgment
• Court of Appeal Sanctions hearing: 70 key points of the judgment
• What is meant by “serious and significant”? The court concentrates more upon the effect of the breach rather than the breach itself.
• Sanctions judgment the key points 1: Stages 1 and 2.
• Sanctions judgment 2: the third stage and cracking down on “opportunism”
• Sanctions judgment 3: the individual cases Denton.
• Sanctions judgment 4: Decadent Vapours
• Sanctions hearing 5: Utilise -v- Davies
• Sanctions hearing 6: Useful links and watch the judgment
• Denton: the dissenting judgment of Jackson LJ considered.

“SURVIVING DENTON” (GENERAL LITIGATION STRATEGY AFTER DENTON)

• Litigation after Jackson (post Denton edition): 12 point survival guide.
• Case management after Denton: directions and court orders should be “realistic and achievable”.
• Denton, relief from sanctions and the “litigator’s dilemma”: life is now dangerous for respondents.
• Anatomy of a post-Denton application for relief from sanctions 1: the death of the word “trivial”.
• Anatomy of a post-Denton application for relief from sanctions 2: the reason may not be good enough but this does not prevent relief being granted.
• Anatomy of a post-Denton application for relief from sanctions 3: the “third stage”: everything is in the mix.
• Anatomy of a post-Denton application for relief from sanctions 4: costs, indemnity costs and every is at risk as to costs.
• Anatomy of a post-Denton relief from sanctions application: all the links in one place.
• “Historic” sanctions decisions: are you going to apply to appeal out of time?

CASES IN JULY 2014

• Denton applied in the Tax Tribunal: No permission to appeal three years late
• Denton applied: a (very) brief report.
• Post Denton Relief from Sanctions appeal in the High Court: relief from sanctions granted: “unreasonable” defendant ordered to pay costs.

CASES IN AUGUST 2014

• Another relief from sanctions case – another Conservative MP: relief granted after failure to serve notice of funding.
• Failure to serve notice of amended CFA details is not a serious or significant breach: High Court decision considered in detail.
• Denton applied in the Tax and Chancery Chamber: Leeds -v- Commissioners considered.
• Denton principles and extending time for appealing: Court of Appeal observations.
• Denton considered in the Tax Tribunal: Elder -v- Revenue & Customs

CASES IN OCTOBER 2014

• Relief from sanctions granted:  Respondent’s “opportunistic” behaviour condemned.
• Relief from sanctions, very late service of witness statements and documents.
• Relief from sanctions failing to give notification of CFA & ATE
• Extensions of time: Respondent’s notices, the “Mitchell” principles & the seriousness and significance of the breach.
• Failing to turn up for hearings and serving witness statements late: an example of the discretion being exercised.
• Setting aside judgment, Mitchell and Denton, the Court of Appeal’s view.
• Denton applies to applications to set aside default judgments: Hockley -v- North East Lincolnshire considered.

CASES IN NOVEMBER 2014

• Case not struck out because of a failure to file trial bundle and pay court fees.
• Lord Chancellor refused relief from sanctions: CPR 3.9 applies to the high and mighty as well.
• Costs Schedule filed late: Costs assessed at nil: no relief from sanctions.
• Relief from sanctions granted despite inadequate replies and breach of peremptory order.
• An important case on costs: “Interested party” costs; relief from sanctions and summary assessment.
• One year late in serving a witness statement: relief from sanctions granted – but on terms.
• Relief from sanctions refused when defendant was tactically playing for time.
• Supreme Court Judgment: Signature of Disclosure List, Case Management and Compliance.
• Applications to set aside default judgment and the Mitchell/Denton criteria: another High Court Case.
• Relief from sanctions can be heard without a formal application: Cutler -v- Barnet.
• Relief from sanctions refused: Denton made no difference.

 CASES IN DECEMBER 2014

• Greig -v- Stirling [2014] EWHC 4017 (QB) (Setting aside an order made without notice).
• British Gas Trading -v- Oak Cash & Carry [2014] EWHC 4058 (QB) (Relief from sanctions overturned on appeal)
• Smailes -v-McNally [2014] EWCA (Failure to comply with peremptory order: order that there had been compliance overturned on appeal) [Not a new case but full transcript only recently became available).
• Mulugeta Guadie Mangiste -v- Endownment Fund for the Rehabilitation of Tigray [2014] EWHC 4196 (Ch) (Denton principles and seeking to avoid payment).
• *R (Dinjan Hysaj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Fathollahipour v Aliabadibenisi; May v Robinson [2014] EWCA Civ 1633 (Mitchell and Denton principles apply to applications to extend time to appeal)
• Walsham Chalet Park Group -v- Tallington Lakes Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1607. (Case Management decisions upheld by the Court of Appeal).
• Zaman -v- Paradise UK Ltd (QBD) 11/12/2014* (Case struck out because repeated failures to comply amounted to an abuse of process).
• QRS -v- Beach & Kordowski [2014] EWHC 2189 (QB) (Setting aside a default judgment when there was no good reason for the defendant’s delay).

CASES IN JANUARY 2015

• Devon & Cornwall Autistic Community Trust -v- Cornwall Council[2015]   (Late application to adjourn trial date refused;relief from sanctions so witness statements served late). Considered at Late service of witness statements and relief from sanctions in the High Court
• Simpson -v- MGN Limited [2015] EWHC 126 (QB) (Consequences of failure to serve costs schedules on opponent). Considered at Preliminary applications: departing from cost budgets and failure to service cost schedules: a High Court Decision.
• Marsh -v- Ministry of Justice (20/01/15) (Failure to file bundles and skeleton arguments). Considered at Get bundles and skeleton arguments to court – or else: Chief Constable cops it.
• Dunbar Assets PLC -v- BCP Premier Limited [2014] EWHC 10 (Ch) (No relief when claim form served by electronic means and not in accordance with the rules). Considered in Service of the Claim Form: E-mailing a copy is not good service (and won’t be excused)
• Rai -v- Jaskaran Singh Bholowasia Pardes Weekly (UK) Ltd [2014] EWHC 4501 (QB)(Oral application for relief from sanctions in failure to serve witness statement permitted). Considered in Late service of witness statements: oral application to extend time granted – but on strict terms.
• Justice Capital Ltd -v- Murphy [2014] All ER (D) 187 (Dec). (Extension of time to challenge administrator’s costs). Considered in Receivers, extensions of time and rigorous costs budgeting to ensure proportionality. 
• Hamdani -v- Khafaf & others [2015] EWHC 38 (QB) (Late service of witness statements) Considered in Relief from sanctions and the late service of witness statements (again).
• Richardson -v- Glencore UK Ltd [2014] EWHC 3990 (Comm) (Casualness in approach to CMCs in Commercial Court) considered in Case Managment, Directions and attendance of the parties: a warning shot from the Commercial Court.
• Nata Lee Ltd -v- Abid [2014] EWCA Civ 1652 (Relief from sanctions and litigants in person) Considered in Relief from Sanctions: Bundles; expert evidence and litigants in person.