THE NEW PRACTICE DIRECTION 2: “THE COURT WILL TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE IMPACT OF THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC”
Looking at paragraph 4 of the Practice Direction today it, in effect, enshrines commonsense. However there are still steps lawyers should take to protect their clients (and their own) position. “In so far as compatible with the proper administration of…
THE NEW PRACTICE DIRECTION: THE LIMITATIONS ON THE POWER TO EXTEND TIME BY AGREEMENT AND MAKING AN APPLICATION
Although it is welcome the new Practice direction is a bit disappointing. It does not trust litigators at all (or not very much). Parties can agree extensions of up to 56 days, without permission of the Court, but not beyond…
IT IS HERE: EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND THE CORONAVIRUS CRISIS
A bit late, but still welcome, is the update, applicable from today which allows the parties to agree a longer extension of time and state, expressly, that problems caused by coronavirus will be taken to account when a court is…
REMOTE WORKING AND THE LITIGATOR 4: YOU CAN AGREE TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: BUT YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL
One question asked after I gave a webinar this morning was whether it is possible for the parties to agree an extension of time for service of the claim form. The brief answer is – yes it is. Care has…
CORONAVIRUS – A USEFUL CASE: MASTER ALLOWS PARTY TO VARY DIRECTIONS BY CONSENT BY 56 DAYS
7BR’s website carries an interesting report from Adam Korn of a judgment today where Master Davison made an order extending the amount of time the parties can agree to vary directions. This was directly because of potential difficulties arising out…
CIVIL LITIGATION IN A TIME OF TOTAL UNCERTAINTY: 10 KEY POINTS ON DIFFICULTIES ARISING OUT OF THE CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK
I cannot recall a time when matters were so rife with uncertainty. By request I have been asked to consider practical steps litigators can take. Equally significantly we have to consider what steps the courts, and the Rules Committee, should…
OUT OF TIME APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF ITS UNDERLYING MERITS: DENTON CONSIDERED
For the second time in two days I am writing about a relief from sanctions case where the court took into account the merits of the underlying case. Yesterday relief was refused because the court held that the case had…
STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 9: SHARING THE “PAIN”
Most of the burden of complying with time periods and court orders lies with the solicitor. However a solicitor’s life can be made easier by making sure that all those concerned with the litigation process know of the deadlines involved…
DISCLOSURE OF SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE LATE: THE FACT THAT THE GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE IS NOT ENOUGH: AN INTERESTING HIGH COURT DECISION
Angus Fergusson has kindly sent me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Grant -v- Newport City Council [2018] EWHC 3813, it is an interesting case where the judge, on appeal, upheld a decision to refuse…
PROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME (CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYERS DO NOT GET EXCITED)
Today seems a good day to consider prospective applications for extensions of time. These are going to figure in every litigators career at some point. A knowledge of the relevant law is essential. A prospective application of time is dealt…
DENTON APPLIED TO OUT OF TIME APPLICATION IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: THE APPLICANT STAYS IN JAIL
In Lakatamia v SU [2019] EWCA Civ 1626 the Court of Appeal refused an application for permission to appeal out of time in a case where the applicant had been committed to prison for contempt. “Hysaj establishes that the…
WHEN A JUDGE MAKES A WRONG DECISION BECAUSE RELEVANT PAPERS (WHICH HAVE BEEN SENT TO COURT IN GOOD TIME) HAVE NOT REACHED THEM
The decision in Singh v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 1504 related to a case where a decision was made when the judge was not given relevant papers that had arrived at court. “In…
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 11: PROCEDURE: AN EIGHT POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE
Here we have a short eight point guide on some of the key problem areas in relation to procedure once proceedings have been issued. Rule 1: Have everything ready pre-issue and have a plan. Effectively this means that you have,…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 58: HOW TO CALCULATE TIME IN THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES
The previous post on the errors made in relation to calculation of time highlight the need for practitioners to be aware of the precise rules in relation to calculation of time. In this respect this may be the easiest post…
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT LITIGATORS KNOW HOW TO COMPUTE TIME PROPERLY: 7 DAYS MEANS 7 DAYS: APPLICATION TWO DAYS LATE: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF
In Evans v Pinsent Masons LLP [2019] EWHC 2150 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer overturned a decision granting relief from sanctions. A major issue arose out of confusion by the claimant’s solicitors over the calculation of the time period. This…
WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE TEST IF SOMEONE APPLIES IN ADVANCE TO EXTEND TIME TO COMPLY WITH A PEREMPTORY ORDER? HIGH COURT DECISION
In Everwarm Ltd v BN Rendering Ltd [2019] EWHC 2078 (TCC) Mr Alexander Nissen QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered the appropriate test to be applied when the court made a peremptory order and an application was…
APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DETAILED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS REFUSED:
There are many lessons that litigation lawyers can learn from the judgment of Master Leonard in Rattan v Carter-Ruck Solicitors [2019] EWHC B9 (Costs). It is a case where a client agreed to a settlement and then, essentially, sought to…
COURT ENTERS JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT OF DEFENCE – SIDESTEPPING THE LATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE ARGUMENT: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIES
In Hanson & Ors v Carlino & Anor [2019] EWHC 1940 (Ch) Mrs Justice Falk neatly sidestepped the vexed question of when a claimant can enter judgment in default of acknowledgement of service by entering judgment in default of defence. …
AGREEMENTS TO EXTEND TIME : THEY CAN BE A GOOD THING – BUT MUST BE DONE PROPERLY
In Cowan v Foreman & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1336 the Court of Appeal were far more supportive of the idea that parties in Inheritance Act claims could agree a “limitation amnesty”. However an agreement has to be drafted with…
PROVING THINGS 160: DELAY MUST BE EXPLAINED: COURT CAN DIRECT THAT EXTRA EVIDENCE BE FILED
In Hendry v Hendry & Ors [2019] EWHC 1976 (Ch) Master Shuman refused the claimant’s application for an extension of time to bring proceedings under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. THE CASE The claimant was married…