COST BITES 460: THE FACT THAT A DEFENDANT LOST ON A COUNTERCLAIM DID NOT PREVENT THE COURT FROM ORDERING THE CLAIMANT TO PAY 70% OF THEIR COSTS: ORDER UPHELD ON APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT
There are certain cases that litigators should keep in their cabinets to show to clients who are overkeen to litigate. This is one of them. The parties were arguing over a boundary line, with one of the issues being whether…
EXPERT WATCH 76 : EXPERT EVIDENCE MAY ASSIST, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT IS REASONABLY REQUIRED: PERMISSION REFUSED IN AN APPEAL WORTH TENS OF MILLIONS
We are looking at a case where the tribunal considered whether a party should be granted permission to rely on expert evidence. The judge went back to first principles to consider the issue. It was a high value case with…
THE DISCLOSURE OF PART 36 OFFERS: IS THE DATE OF AN OFFER PART OF ITS “TERMS”? A QUESTION THAT HAS SOME PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES: THE HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE ISSUE
The rules allow the parties to disclose the existence of a Part 36 offer after a split trial. However the judge cannot be told the “terms” of the offer. Here the court considered the interesting (and important) issue of whether…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: 10 KEY POINTS ABOUT DRAFTING A DEFENCE AND THE POSTS THAT SHOW WHY THIS MATTERS
The post last Friday about the inadequate drafting of a defence was the 19th this year on the way in which defences are pleaded. This is a useful time to visit some basic principles in relation to how a defence…
You must be logged in to post a comment.