APPLICANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY UPON A WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS SERVED LATE: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS EFFECTIVELY A FORM OF CHEATING

APPLICANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY UPON A WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS SERVED LATE: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS EFFECTIVELY A FORM OF CHEATING

Here we are looking at a case from the family jurisdiction.  Slightly different rules apply, however the overall principles are the same as in the CPR. The judge had to consider whether to grant permission to an applicant to rely…

MEMBER NEWS: HONING IN ON THE INTERNAL RESEARCH FACILITY ON THIS SITE: WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION - SOME GUIDANCE

MEMBER NEWS: HONING IN ON THE INTERNAL RESEARCH FACILITY ON THIS SITE: WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION – SOME GUIDANCE

Yesterday I had an enquiry about the internal search function on this site. In particular whether it used  Boolean operators. It doesn’t but there is a “work around” discussed below.  On a separate issue I also recorded a webinar on…

PART 36: SHOULD THE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES APPLY WHEN A CLAIMANT HAD, EFFECTIVELY, OFFERED "NIL" ON A COUNTERCLAIM (THAT FAILED)?

PART 36: SHOULD THE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES APPLY WHEN A CLAIMANT HAD, EFFECTIVELY, OFFERED “NIL” ON A COUNTERCLAIM (THAT FAILED)?

Here we are looking at some interesting arguments on Part 36 put forward by an, obviously disappointed, defendant.  The claimant had beaten its own Part 36 offer and defeated the defendant’s counterclaim totally.  Nevertheless, the defendant argued, this was not…