MAZUR MATTERS 33: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (2): THE LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE
We continue with our rare trip inside the Houses of Parliament by looking at the response that the Minister for Courts and Legal Services to the letter from the Chair of the Justice Committee. (We are seeing how Mazur…
DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025: LOOKING AT MISTAKES IN LITIGATION TO AVOID REPEATS NEXT YEAR…
It is that time of year when we can look back and reflect on events of the previous 12 months. Here we are looking at what lessons can be learnt from cases on default and sanctions since November 2024. As…
MAZUR MATTERS 32: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (1): THE LETTER FROM THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE TO THE MINISTER
It is rare for there to be Parliamentary consideration of the matters discussed in this blog. Quite often we are trying to divine what it is that Parliament actually meant when it drafted a statute. In the Mazur case Parliament…
COST BITES 305: THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO AWARD COSTS AGAINST A PARTY WHEN TWO ACTIONS WERE “JOINED” AND NOT “CONSOLIDATED”: AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION IN THE RULES
We are looking at a case where the appellant was successful in overturning an award for costs made against him in relation to one set of proceedings. The judgment highlights the important distinction between “joinder” and “consolidation”. That distinction can…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: DISTILLING THE GESTMIN GUIDELINES: WHICH WITNESS WILL BE BELIEVED? (AND WHAT PART OF THEIR EVIDENCE ACCEPTED?)
Over the past month or so there have been at least half a dozen cases where the judge references Gestmin – the consideration and guidance given to judicial fact finding, particularly in relation to witness evidence. These range from actions…
You must be logged in to post a comment.