MAZUR MATTERS 44: THE SRA STATES IT WILL TREAT “SYMPATHETICALLY” SELF-REPORTED INCIDENCES BASED ON MISTAKEN INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
The SRA updated its guidance on “Mazur and conducting litigation” today. This includes its likely approach to reports of past errors. The SRA states that it will look on such issues “sympathetically”. After all practising lawyers were not the only…
REVISITING THE ISSUES: THAT IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A DENIAL IN A DEFENCE: THE KEY CASES CONSIDERED
The post earlier today about the significant difference between a non-admission and denial has led me to revisit previous posts on the case. This post from 2020 which reviewed the case law on the distinction. There are plenty of clear…
COST BITES 314: PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT IN THE RTA PROTOCOL: CLAIMANT LIMITED TO FIXED COSTS
This is the second case today that was sent in by a helpful reader. I am grateful to Ben Millns from Kennedys who has sent me a copy of this judgment. It relates to the question of whether a personal…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 42: THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A “DENIAL”: DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE CASE WAS PLEADED
This is the first of two interesting cases today that have been sent in by readers. I am grateful to Rebecca McVety of the Dental Law Partnership for sending me this judgment which deals with pleadings, in particular the very…
You must be logged in to post a comment.