PRACTICE DIRECTION AMENDMENTS: 193rd UPDATE: CHANGES TO RULES ABOUT DISCLOSURE IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS: THE COURT CAN ORDER A PARTY TO SEEK INSPECTION FROM “ANY PERSON”
There are several amendments in Practice Directions made in the the most recent update. Here we look at one that is directly related to the rule change we looked at last week. The amendment introduces into the Business and Property…
COST BITES 351: WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE COSTS BUDGETS IN PRACTICE? “COMPARE AND MATCH” IS NOT ALWAYS AN ACCURATE GUIDE:THE KEY QUESTION IS – WHO WILL BE DOING THE MOST WORK?
The previous post looked at the judge’s general observations in this case. Here we look how those principles were applied in practice. It is clear that the arguments that the costs were excessive by way of comparison did not always…
COST BITES 350: KNOWING HOW JUDGES APPROACH BUDGETING WHEN ONE SIDE SEEKS MUCH MORE THAN ANOTHER: IS THE COURT A “SLAVE TO COMPARISON”?
It is always important, and enlightening, to have a close look at judicial observations on the nature of costs budgeting. We have a useful judgment here. The judge considered the applicable principles and guidance before carrying out budgeting in a…
PROVING THINGS 279: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO FIND IMPECUNIOSITY EVEN THOUGH THERE HAD BEEN OMISSIONS IN DISCLOSURE
Credit hire litigation has given rise to a number of reported cases over the years. It gives rise to particular issues of procedure and evidence. In particular the need for a claimant to establish “impecuniosity” in order to justify the…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DATE OF RECEIPT AT COURT FOR LIMITATION PURPOSES AND DATE OF ISSUE FOR THE PURPOSES OF SERVICE: AVOID TESTING THIS DISTINCTION IF YOU CAN
Here we look at an issue that can cause confusion, it is important from the point of view of determining the date from which the date of service runs. The relevant date for limitation purposes is the date of receipt…
You must be logged in to post a comment.