“UNNECESSARILY ARGUMENTATIVE OR WASTEFUL CORRESPONDENCE” NOT COUNTENANCED IN COSTS BUDGETING: “IT TAKES TWO TO TANGO”
The post earlier this morning on “intemperate” comments in court documents and correspondence reminded me that I meant to highlight a particular aspect of the judgment in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB). The judgment highlights that unnecessarily argumentative…
WRITING INFLAMMATORY THINGS IN COURT DOCUMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE: IT NEVER, EVER, HELPS
We are looking at the judgment of HHJ Edward Hess in TM v KM [2022] EWFC 155 for two reasons: firstly the costs involved; secondly the judge’s observations about the unattractiveness of putting personal pejorative remarks in court documents. There…
You must be logged in to post a comment.