A COURT ORDER IS A SERIOUS, NOT TRIVIAL, MATTER: A PARTY IN BREACH CANNOT ACT AS IF THE ORDER HAD NEVER BEEN MADE: “THAT SHIP HAS SAILED”.
One of the most imprudent things to do in litigation is to let a court order be made, not comply and then respond by arguing that the order should never have been made anyway. We see an example of this…
THE AUTOMATIC STAY AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AN ISSUE “DESTINED TO LIVE OUT ITS LITIGATION LIFE IN A LIMBO OF OBITER OBSERVATIONS”
The judgment of Mr Justice Foxton in Bank of America Europe DAC v CITTA Metropolitana Di Milano [2022] EWHC 1544 (Comm) serves of a salutary reminder (to some) of the existence of the automatic stay in civil proceedings. A claimant…
NINE YEARS ON IX: 2022: EXPERTS, STRIDENT LANGUAGE AND THE DUTY OWED TO THE COURT
In the final post of this series I have chosen a post from January 2022. There are many common themes on this blog: relief from sanctions; service of the claim form; Part 36; witness statements, among them. However it is…
You must be logged in to post a comment.