LAKATAMIA SHIPPING -v- NOBU SU: A TRIVIAL BREACH CONSIDERED
Relief from sanctions was granted by Hamblen J in the case of Lakatamia Shipping -v- Nobu Su [2014] EWHC 275 (Comm). A full blog post on the case will will follow. For the time being I will note his conclusion….
SCHEDULE OF COSTS SERVED 18 MINUTES LATE DOES NOT LEAD TO COSTS BEING DISALLOWED
I have already commented on the highly technical points being taken as a result of the Mitchell decision. In Devon County Council -v- Celtic Bioenergy Ltd [2014] EWHC 309 (TCCStuart-Smith J considered the effect of a schedule of costs being…
NEWLAND CONSIDERS NEW GROUND: LOSS OF LEGAL REPRESENTATION NOT A “GOOD REASON” FOR OBTAINING RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS.
The case of Newland –v- Toba Trading involves some complex facts. However it is important that it is reviewed n detail because there are important observations on civil procedure. In particular whether a party should apply for a review or…
FAILING TO SIGN STATEMENT OF TRUTH DOES NOT MEAN COSTS BUDGET WAS FILED OUT OF TIME: HIGH COURT DECISION
It has to be recognised that the decision in Mitchell means, inevitably, that parties will take issue with minor breaches. Indeed it may be negligent for them not do so. In The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland…
SANCTIONS: EXTENDING TIME AND DISPUTING THE JURISDICTION: PART 11 AND THE MITCHELL CRITERIA
The Mitchell criteria were considered by Mr Justice Blair in S.E.T. Select Engineering GMBH –v- F&M Bunkering Ltd [2014] EWHC 192 (Comm). There are some interesting observations about whether relief from sanctions applies when an application to dispute jurisdiction is…
