RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED AFTER CLAIMANTS BREACHED PEREMPTORY ORDER: RETIRED FOOTBALLERS ALLOWED TO STAY ON THE FIELD...

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED AFTER CLAIMANTS BREACHED PEREMPTORY ORDER: RETIRED FOOTBALLERS ALLOWED TO STAY ON THE FIELD…

We are looking today at a case with an unusual, if not extraordinary, procedural history.  The Master observed that the claimants had been very poorly represented in the past:  “It is abundantly clear from the succession of retainers and instructions…

COST BITES 273: A QUICK LOOK AT A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT: YOU CAN HAVE A ROLLS ROYCE SERVICE, BUT YOU CAN'T EXPECT THE OTHER SIDE TO PAY FOR IT...

COST BITES 273: A QUICK LOOK AT A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT: YOU CAN HAVE A ROLLS ROYCE SERVICE, BUT YOU CAN’T EXPECT THE OTHER SIDE TO PAY FOR IT…

We are continuing with the practice of having a close look at the result of a summary assessment.  The judge’s observations in this case are particularly telling, about  the basis of assessment, hourly rates, the use of leading counsel and…

KEY ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED WHEN A PARTY WANTS AN INJUNCTION: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS  JUDGE'S DECISION NOT TO DELIVER...

KEY ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED WHEN A PARTY WANTS AN INJUNCTION: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS JUDGE’S DECISION NOT TO DELIVER…

This is a Court of Appeal decision that anyone applying for, or resisting, an application for an injunction would benefit from reading.  It deals with some of the key issues in relation to injunctions.  There was a “serious issue to…

APPLICANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY UPON A WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS SERVED LATE: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS EFFECTIVELY A FORM OF CHEATING

APPLICANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY UPON A WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS SERVED LATE: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS EFFECTIVELY A FORM OF CHEATING

Here we are looking at a case from the family jurisdiction.  Slightly different rules apply, however the overall principles are the same as in the CPR. The judge had to consider whether to grant permission to an applicant to rely…

PART 36: SHOULD THE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES APPLY WHEN A CLAIMANT HAD, EFFECTIVELY, OFFERED "NIL" ON A COUNTERCLAIM (THAT FAILED)?

PART 36: SHOULD THE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES APPLY WHEN A CLAIMANT HAD, EFFECTIVELY, OFFERED “NIL” ON A COUNTERCLAIM (THAT FAILED)?

Here we are looking at some interesting arguments on Part 36 put forward by an, obviously disappointed, defendant.  The claimant had beaten its own Part 36 offer and defeated the defendant’s counterclaim totally.  Nevertheless, the defendant argued, this was not…