CONSTRUING A COURT ORDER: WHAT DOES THE WORD “IMPECUNIOSITY” MEAN? “IT DEPENDS” – THE ISSUE CONSIDERED ON APPEAL IN THE HIGH COURT
In this case the court made a court order which meant that the claimant was debarred from relying on issues relating to “impecuniosity” at trial. The appeal was, in part, about what “impecuniosity” meant in that context. (It was reasonable…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 41: HAD THE DEFENDANT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY?
A party alleging fraud or dishonesty cannot “ambush” their opponent at trial. Fraud must be fully particularised and pleaded. Do identical principles apply to allegations of fundamental dishonesty? In this case the judge considered an argument that points in relation…
You must be logged in to post a comment.