A FITTING END TO THE BAYEUX THEMED WEEK: SHOULD FRANCE HAVE JURISDICTION IN THIS CASE? MORE ABOUT LAWYERS USING WITNESS STATEMENTS TO PUT FORWARD LEGAL ARGUMENTS (DO IT IF YOU WILL – BUT IT NEVER HELPS…)
Observant readers (and possibly the less observant ones) will have noticed that this week we have been paying homage to the arrival of the Bayeux Tapestry in the UK. It is fitting then that we end the week with a…
COST BITES 451 : INTEREST ON COSTS A RECENT JUDGMENT, A REVIEW OF POSTS AND USEFUL CHECKLISTS FOR THE RECEIVING PARTY
Here we look at a recent decision on interest on costs. It also provides an opportunity to review previous posts on the topic and use them to look at a checklist on these issues for the receiving party. “I was…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 92: THE NEED TO PROVIDE PARTICULARS OF SIGNIFICANT ALLEGATIONS: DEFENDANTS’ (LARGELY) SUCCESSFUL REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION NEEDED BEFORE THEY FILED A DEFENCE
Reports relating to requests for further information are relatively rare. In this case the judge considers the defendants’ request in detail. The claimant was not ordered to answer all of the questions raised. However the judgment does illustrate important issues…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: “OFFICE GOSSIP PROVES NOTHING”: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF” (SEPTEMBER 2016)
This post written a decade ago deals with a recurring point in litigation as we have already seen this week. The tendency of witnesses, and lawyers to allow witnesses, to give “evidence” in witness statements of matters on which they…
You must be logged in to post a comment.