APPLICATION FOR RELIEF REFUSED BECAUSE THE UNDERLYING CLAIM WAS MISCONCEIVED: A RARE EXAMPLE OF THE MERITS OF THE ACTION BEING CONSIDERED
In Price, R v (on the application of) v The Crown Court at Snaresbrook [2020] EWHC 496 (Admin) Mr Justice Freedman refused the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions because the underlying claim was “hopeless”. This is a rare example…
PLEADING A DEFENCE PROPERLY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DENIAL AND A NON-ADMISSION: HIGH COURT GOES BACK TO BASIC PRINCIPLES
There are some interesting observations about statements of case in the judgment of Mr Justice Warby in Aven & Ors v Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd [2020] EWHC 523 (QB). This case emphasises the difference between a non-admission and a denial…
SERVING PROCEEDINGS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSE GOOSE’S APPEAL : THE DANGERS OF OVERLOOKING THE BASIC OBLIGATION TO SERVE
In Canada Goose UK Retail Ltd & Anor v Unknown Persons [2020] EWCA Civ 303 the Court of Appeal upheld the judge’s decision not to grant the claimant any kind of relief due to a failure to properly serve the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.