THIRD PARTY HAD FUNDED THE LITIGATION AND WAS LIABLE TO PAY THE DEFENDANT'S COSTS : A "CHILDISH AND INEFFECTUAL ATTEMPT" TO DECEIVE THE COURT DID NOT PASS MUSTER

THIRD PARTY HAD FUNDED THE LITIGATION AND WAS LIABLE TO PAY THE DEFENDANT’S COSTS : A “CHILDISH AND INEFFECTUAL ATTEMPT” TO DECEIVE THE COURT DID NOT PASS MUSTER

May 13, 2025 · by · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

It is a well known principle that a third party funder can be liable to pay the costs of an action.  However what happens when the funding agreement is dressed up as something else – a car sale for instance? …

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 102: HOW NOT TO WRITE A LEGAL LETTER (2): SOME EXAMPLES - THREATENING TO SUBJECT YOUR OPPONENT TO THE "LEGAL EQUIVALENT OF A PROCTOLOGY EXAM"

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 102: HOW NOT TO WRITE A LEGAL LETTER (2): SOME EXAMPLES – THREATENING TO SUBJECT YOUR OPPONENT TO THE “LEGAL EQUIVALENT OF A PROCTOLOGY EXAM”

May 13, 2025 · by · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We are continuing with this back to basics series with some more examples of how not to write legal correspondence.   We are looking at an (extreme) example, some guidance from the SRA and then the principles considered in more recent cases….