A FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: SOCIAL MEDIA, SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE AND INACCURATE STATEMENTS LEAD TO CLAIMANT LOSING £44,890
I am grateful to Aled Morris from Horwich Farrely for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Beard in Anderson -v- Porch (14th January 2021), a copy of which is available here OT APPROVED HORWICH, F38YJ633, ANDERSON, PORCH,…
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH DIRECTIONS IN THE FAMILY COURT: “THEY ARE NOT PREFERENCES, REQUESTS OR MERE INDICATIONS; THEY ARE ORDERS”
I am always wary of venturing into an area occupied by many exceptional family bloggers. However court order, and in particular compliance with court orders, is part of the regular diet of this blog. That is why a case with…
JOURNALIST ALLOWED TO VIEW DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN COURT JUDGMENT SIX YEARS AGO: CPR 5.4C CONSIDERED
In Goodley v The Hut Group Ltd [2021] EWHC 1193 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver allowed a journalist’s application for sight of documents referred to in open court. The judgment contains some important observations in relation to CPR 5.4C. THE…
You must be logged in to post a comment.