Children: Public Law Update (July 2014) – Family Law Week

Posted July 25th, 2014 in care orders, case management, children, DNA, families, jurisdiction, news by tracey

‘John Tughan, barrister, of 4 Paper Buildings reviews recent important judgments in public law children cases.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 24th July 2014

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off

‘Arrogant’ barrister has contempt finding set aside – Law Society’s Gazette

‘A barrister accused of ‘breathtaking arrogance’ has had a contempt finding against him set aside, but been referred to the bar’s regulator.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 23rd July 2014

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off

In re M-F (Children) (Appeal: Case Management: Necessary Delay) – WLR Daily

Posted July 23rd, 2014 in adjournment, care orders, case management, children, delay, law reports by michael

In re M-F (Children) (Appeal: Case Management: Necessary Delay) [2014] EWCA Civ 991;  [2014] WLR (D)  326

‘Section 32(1)(a)(ii) of the Children Act 1989, as amended, required that care cases be concluded within 26 weeks. However, that time limit could be extended if it was necessary to enable the court to resolve the proceedings justly since the 26 weeks rule was not, and must never be allowed to become, a straightjacket, least of all if rigorous adherence to an inflexible timetable risked putting justice in jeopardy.’

WLR Daily, 15th July 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Applications Without Notice: A Practitioner’s Guide – Family Law Week

Posted July 22nd, 2014 in case management, children, family courts, freezing injunctions, news by sally

‘Rodney Noon, solicitor, provides a detailed review of the law and practice of – and the court’s attitude to – without notice applications in family proceedings.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 17th July 2014

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off

Court of Appeal warns of consequences for overly long bundles and skeletons – Litigation Futures

Posted July 15th, 2014 in appeals, case management, civil procedure rules, costs, courts, news by tracey

‘The Court of Appeal has hit out forcefully at unnecessarily long bundles and skeleton arguments that are anything but.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 15th July 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off

Mitchell: conjoined appeals – Law Society’s Gazette

‘Practitioners will be conscious of the ridiculous practice that ensued in the lower courts following the ‘guidance’ dispensed by the Court of Appeal in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers [2013] EWCA Civ 1537 as to the operation and application of rule 3.9 of the Civil Procedure Rules – Relief from Sanction.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 14th July 2014

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off

Americhem Europe Ltd v Rakem Ltd (George Walker Transport Ltd, Part 20 defendant) – WLR Daily

Americhem Europe Ltd v Rakem Ltd (George Walker Transport Ltd, Part 20 defendant) [2014] EWHC 1881 (TCC); [2014] WLR (D) 270

‘A costs draftsman whose only involvement in a case consisted of preparing a costs budget and who did not give any form of legal advice or legally based representation was not a “senior legal representative” for the purposes of paragraph 6 of Practice Direction 3E on Costs Management.’

WLR Daily, 13th June 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Will Court of Appeal triple-header lead to ‘Mitchell-lite’? – Litigation Futures

Posted June 20th, 2014 in appeals, budgets, case management, civil procedure rules, costs, news by tracey

‘A barrister who has led the way in analysing the impact of the Mitchell case has predicted that this week’s hearing of three “trivial breach” cases at the Court of Appeal could pave the way for “Mitchell-lite”.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 19th June 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off

Can A Consent Order Be Set Aside In Financial Proceedings? – Family Law week

Posted June 20th, 2014 in case management, consent orders, news, practice directions, setting aside by tracey

‘In the light of TF v PJ [2014] EWHC 1780 (Fam), Francis Wilkinson, barrister of Field Court Chambers, asks whether an application to set aside is permissible where there has been a change of circumstances which undermines the basis of a consent order – and suggests an answer.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 18th June 2014

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off

Lord Dyson to rule on whether cheque for court fees should have been put in Christmas post – Litigation Futures

Posted June 12th, 2014 in appeals, case management, courts, fees, news, sanctions, solicitors by sally

‘One of the three Mitchell cases to be heard by the Master of the Rolls next week centres on whether a solicitor should have put a cheque in the post shortly before Christmas to pay for the hearing fee.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 12th June 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off

The Jackson Reforms: One year on – Falcon Chambers

‘The anniversary of the implementation of the Jackson reforms looms. Has all the fear and dread it engendered at the time been justified? Views will vary, whether because of temperament or because of preference, but in our view, for what it’s worth, the answer is “yes”. In the sphere of relief from sanctions at least, and in the kind of costs budgeting that we most often face, many of the concerns warned of in advance have come to pass. The by now well-know case of Andrew Mitchell has illustrated the draconian approach being taken by the courts to relief from sanctions, with the support of what appears to be a hand-picked Court of Appeal. The methodology of county courts in dealing with costs budgeting and CCMCs varies widely, making it difficult to predict or advise on procedural issues in the run up to trials and hearings.’

Full story (PDF)

Falcon Chambers, 25th March 2014

Source: www.falcon-chambers.com

Comments Off

Appeal court set for triple Mitchell showdown – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted June 4th, 2014 in appeals, budgets, case management, civil procedure rules, costs, delay, news by tracey

‘Master of the rolls Lord Dyson is to hear three consecutive appeals over two days in an effort to clarify the post-Mitchell landscape on compliance with case management rules.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 3rd June 2014

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off

In re Lehman Brothers (International) (Europe) (in administration) (No 5) – WLR Daily

In re Lehman Brothers (International) (Europe) (in administration) (No 5); Contrarian Funds LLC v Lomas and others [2014] EWHC 1687 (Ch);  [2014] WLR (D)  233

‘Approach of court to applications for extensions of time under the Insolvency Rules 1986 in light of the reformulation of CPR r 3.9 and the test to be applied on an application for relief from sanctions.’

WLR Daily, 23rd May 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

This is what we always meant – NearlyLegal

Posted May 27th, 2014 in case management, civil procedure rules, news, sanctions by sally

‘Regular readers of this blog (when it is accessible) will know that we are a housing law blog. However, housing law (for the most part) is covered by the overarching umbrella of civil law and we do therefore occasionally cover the odd important non-housing civil law development. It is for that reason that we have been following with interest (as is every single civil lawyer in England and Wales) the “fall-out” from the Jackson reforms.’

Full story

NearlyLegal, 23rd May 2014

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

Comments Off

In re S (Children) (Care Proceedings: Fact-finding Hearings) – WLR Daily

Posted May 22nd, 2014 in appeals, care orders, case management, children, law reports by sally

In re S (Children) (Care Proceedings: Fact-finding Hearings) [2014] EWCA Civ 638; [2014] WLR (D) 217

‘Reiterating the inappropriateness of separate fact-finding hearings in most care proceedings, it was essential that if there was to be a separate fact-finding hearing, the ambit of the hearing should be clearly defined and understood by all and, if the ambit altered as the case proceeded, that the adjustment was promptly reflected in the schedule of findings sought and that there was an authentic, definitive record of precisely what findings the judge had made.’

WLR Daily, 14th May 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Liars and Divorce Lawyers: can an OS/DS hearing help and a possible future for split hearings in financial remedies? – Family Law Week

Posted May 6th, 2014 in case management, divorce, financial provision, news by tracey

‘Byron James, barrister, Fourteen considers the utility of OS/DS hearings in the resolution of financial remedies disputes.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 2nd May 2014

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off

Relief from sanction and witness statements – The Barristers’ Hub

Posted April 24th, 2014 in case management, civil procedure rules, disclosure, news, sanctions, witnesses by tracey

‘The Court of Appeal last week handed down judgment in the case of Chartwell Estate Agents v. Fergies Property & Anor. [2014] E. W. C. A. Civ. 506. It is an important decision for all civil practitioners, as it deals directly with the question of relief from sanction under the modified Rule 3.9 of the Civil Procedure Rules, and mollifies to some extent the (at least perceived) harshness of the rule in Mitchell v. News Group Newspapers [2014] 1 W. L. R. 795 – so much so that the Westlaw service run by respected legal publishers Sweet & Maxwell now state that the Mitchell decision has received “mixed or mildly negative judicial treatment”.’

Full story

The Barristers’ Hub, 23rd April 2014

Source: www.barristershub.co.uk

Comments Off

The Child Arrangements Programme 2014: The Key Provisions – Family Law week

‘Louise McCallum, barrister at Zenith Chambers, Leeds, looks at the new Child Arrangements Programme that came into force on 22 April 2014.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 23rd April 2014

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off

Kershaw v Roberts and another – WLR Daily

Posted April 15th, 2014 in budgets, case management, civil procedure rules, costs, law reports by tracey

Kershaw v Roberts and another: [2014] EWHC 1037 (Ch);   [2014] WLR (D)  168

‘Claims issued under CPR Pt 8 were not automatically allocated to the multi-track with the result that the provisions of CPR Pt 29 and the costs management provisions in section II of CPR Pt 3 were of no application unless and until the claim had been allocated to the multi-track by the procedural judge considering the claim.’

WLR Daily, 10th April 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

First hearing not a case management conference, says High Court – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted April 15th, 2014 in budgets, case management, civil procedure rules, costs, news, trials by tracey

‘A claimant has failed in a High Court Mitchell bid to argue that an initial hearing amounted to a case management conference (CMC) and should be subject to budgeting rules.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 14th April 2014

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off