AN INSURER’S ADMISSION BINDS INSURED DEFENDANT EVEN THOUGH INDEMNITY WAS SUBSEQUENTLY WITHDRAWN: APPLICATION TO RESILE FROM THAT ADMISSION DISMISSED…
Here we have a case where the judge held that the defendant was bound by an admission made by its own insurer. The defendant was refused permission to withdraw from that admission and the claimant granted summary judgement. “I am…
SERVICE POINTS 39: ISSUES OVER CORRECT SPANISH ADDRESS DID NOT RENDER SERVICE INVALID
Here we have a case as to service when the claimant was successful. There were issues as to service as to the correct address and the correct means of service in Spain. The claimant adduced evidence from a Spanish lawyer…
COST BITES 383: WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS FOLLOWING “MIXED” SUCCESS AT A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION? WHAT IS A FAIR AND REASONABLE AMOUNT? (SOMETHING ABOUT APPROPRIATE DELEGATION AND HOURLY RATES TOO…)
This judgment considers issues relating to the liability of costs, reasons why “mixed” success should lead to a reduction and the appropriate quantum for costs on a summary assessment. There are also interesting issues here in relation to hourly rates…


You must be logged in to post a comment.