Surrogacy Law Update (February 2015) – Family Law Week

Posted February 27th, 2015 in consent, limitations, news, surrogacy by tracey

‘Andrew Powell, barrister of 4 Paper Buildings, reviews recent important judgments concerning surrogacy including the President’s landmark decision in Re X.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 26th February 2015

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off

Jimmy Savile and the complex question of victim compensation – The Guardian

‘It is now known that 60 people from Stoke Mandeville hospital were abused by Jimmy Savile. But will they and his other victims receive compensation? And where will the money come from?’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 26th February 2015

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off

Personal injury: duty of care – Law Society’s Gazette

‘In December the High Court gave judgment in NA v Nottinghamshire County Council [2014] EWHC 4005 (QB). The claimant (who was born in 1977) said that while in her mother’s care she had suffered physical and emotional abuse, and that the defendant local authority had failed in their common law duty of care by failing either to remove her or protect her from the abuse.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 23rd February 2015

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off

High Court: barrister has arguable discrimination claim against BSB – Legal Futures

‘A black barrister had an arguable case that she was indirectly discriminated against by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) through its disciplinary procedures, the High Court ruled yesterday.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 19th December 2014

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Comments Off

Costs, Confusion and Compromise – Keynote Address of Mr Justice Foskett

Posted December 4th, 2014 in arbitration, costs, fees, judges, limitations, news, speeches by sally

Costs, Confusion and Compromise (PDF)

Keynote Address of Mr Justice Foskett

Professional Negligence Lawyers’ Association Annual Conference, 4th December 2014

Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk

Comments Off

Relief From Sanctions – Part 2 – Applying in Time – Zenith PI Blog

Posted November 25th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, limitations, news, sanctions, time limits by sally

‘Mitchell [2014] 1 WLR 795 and Denton [2014] 1 WLR 3926 dealt with the situation of an application out of time, that is to say when the time had expired for performance of a step dictated by a rule or by practice direction or a court order had expired. But the further question arises, To what extent do the principles laid down there apply in the situation where one applies in time, that is to say before the expiry date? That is of great importance, because, if one is handling a case properly, it should become obvious, at least some days if not weeks in advance, that a particular time limit is not going to be able to be achieved. This may be for a variety of reasons, sometimes because of illness or – tell it not in Gath! – the delays of counsel. This matter was considered in depth fairly recently in Re Guidezone Ltd, Kaneria-v-Kaneria [2014] 1 WLR 3728, by Nugee J. In a full and careful judgment, the judge considered what was the position when an in-time application was made under CPR r.3.1(2)(a) for extension of time. He held that such an application was not an application for relief from sanctions, nor was it closely analogous to one. Therefore, Mitchell did not apply to it.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 25th November 2014

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off

Frontier Estates -v- Berwin Leighton Paisner: in time application for extension of time refused – Zenith PI Blog

Posted November 21st, 2014 in civil procedure rules, limitations, news, time limits by tracey

‘Parties are advised to make applications in advance of the expiry of time limits in order to avoid a breach and have the courts look more favourably on their applications. It must be remembered however that an application made in time is not necessarily bound to succeed.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 21st November 2014

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off

Bewry v Reed Elsevier UK Ltd (trading as LexisNexis) and another – WLR Daily

Posted November 18th, 2014 in appeals, defamation, law reports, limitations, time limits by sally

Bewry v Reed Elsevier UK Ltd (trading as LexisNexis) and another [2014] EWCA Civ 1411; [2014] WLR (D) 474

‘Where a court was determining whether to exercise its discretion under section 32A of the Limitation Act 1980 to disapply the one-year limitation period applying by virtue of section 4A of the 1980 Act to a claim for libel, the claimant’s ignorance of the limitation period would rarely if ever be a factor which carried any or any significant weight given the policy reasons underlying the one-year limitation period for libel claims.’

WLR Daily, 30th October 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Limitation: Constructive Knowledge re-visited. Howard Platt –v- BRB (Residuary) Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 1401 – Zenith PI Blog

Posted November 5th, 2014 in appeals, limitations, medical records, news, personal injuries by sally

‘On 15th October 2014, the Court of Appeal had cause to review the manner in which a claimant might find a claim statute barred by reason of constructive knowledge.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 5th November 2014

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off

Jackson calls for single limitation period – Litigation Futures

Posted November 4th, 2014 in contracts, judges, Law Commission, limitations, news, reports, speeches by sally

‘Lord Justice Jackson has called on the government to create a “single core limitation regime” for all claims in contract and tort, as recommended by the Law Commission.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 4th November 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Comments Off

“It’s too late baby, now it’s too late”: limitation, competition claims and knowledge – Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers

Posted October 31st, 2014 in competition, limitations, news, public interest by sally

‘How much knowledge does a potential claimant need before time begins to run against a competition claim against a party alleged to have breached competition law? This was the key question addressed by Mr Justice Simon in the first case in which an English Court has had to consider the effect of s.32 of the Limitation Act 1980 (“LA”) in the context of a competition claim.’

Full story

Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 31st October 2014

Source: www.competitionbulletin.com

Comments Off

Service by the courts – Law Society’s Gazette

‘A recent case provides clarification and guidance on the issue of service by the courts in contravention of the claimant’s instructions.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 27th October 2014

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off

Second bite of the cherry? Bringing a second action against different employers for development of mesothelioma: abuse of process, cause of action estoppel and discretion under s33 Limitation Act 1980 considered – Zenith PI Blog

‘Would an action against employers who were unidentifiable at the time of an initial claim against 8 other employers in 2003 succeed where it was argued that such proceedings were an abuse of process of the court, that there was cause of action estoppel and where the claim was statute barred and required an application under s 33 Limitation Act 1980?’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 21st October 2014

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Comments Off

Net contribution clauses: What you need to know – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted September 25th, 2014 in construction industry, contracts, damages, limitations, news by sally

‘Most construction professionals will be familiar with net contribution clauses (NCCs) in consultants’ appointments and collateral warranties but their use should not necessarily be limited to the construction sector. They may be useful in any project where professionals from a multiplicity of disciplines are retained.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 19th September 2014

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Comments Off

The quasi-trust – The Barristers’ Hub

‘As every student of equity knows well, a trust is a type of property ownership in which one or more people (the trustee(s)) hold property on behalf of one or more other people (the beneficiary/ies), exercise all the powers of an owner of property in relation to third parties, but are bound to do so for the exclusive interests of the beneficiaries. A trust can be express, made by a formal written implement, or implied, either by transfer of property without explanation (a resulting trust) or in circumstances where the common intention of the parties is or is deemed to be for the property to be held on trust (a constructive trust). Both express and implied trusts are genuine trusts: the property is owned by the trustee, subject to the interest of the beneficiaries.’

Full story

The Barristers’ Hub, 1st August 2014

Source: www.barristershub.co.uk

Comments Off

David T. Morrison & Co Limited t/a Gael Home Interiors (Respondent) v ICL Plastics Limited and others (Appellants) (Scotland) – Supreme Court

David T. Morrison & Co Limited t/a Gael Home Interiors (Respondent) v ICL Plastics Limited and others (Appellants) (Scotland) [2014] UKSC 48 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 30th July 2014

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Comments Off

Ballinger and another v Mercer Ltd and another – WLR Daily

Ballinger and another v Mercer Ltd and another; [2014] EWCA Civ 996; [2014] WLR (D) 335

‘Where a claimant applied to introduce a new claim by amendment under CPR r 17.4, and the defendant could show a prima facie defence of limitation, the burden was on the claimant to show that the defence was not reasonably arguable. Amendments seeking to add or substitute a new cause of action would only be permitted if they arose out of the same or substantially the same facts as were already in issue on the existing claims.’

WLR Daily, 17th July 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Agbenowossi-Koffi v Donvand Ltd (t/a Gullivers Travel Associates) – WLR Daily

Agbenowossi-Koffi v Donvand Ltd (t/a Gullivers Travel Associates): [2014] EWCA Civ 855; [2014] WLR (D) 282

‘Where a claim of race discrimination had been dismissed on limitation grounds those allegations could not be repeated in a second claim together with additional allegations which could have been included in the first claim but had not been, in order to avoid the limitation defence by founding a claim based on conduct extending over a period of time. The second claim was an abuse of process.’

WLR Daily, 24th June 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Dawson v Thomson Airways Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted June 25th, 2014 in airlines, carriage by air, compensation, delay, EC law, law reports, limitations by sally

Dawson v Thomson Airways Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 845; [2014] WLR (D) 279

‘The limitation period applicable to a claim brought in England for compensation for cancellation or delay under articles 5 and 7 of Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 was the six-year period prescribed by section 9 of the Limitation Act 1980.’

WLR Daily, 19th June 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Court of Appeal rules against second airline on flight delays – Law society’s Gazette

Posted June 20th, 2014 in airlines, appeals, compensation, delay, limitations, news by tracey

‘The aviation industry has suffered another court defeat after an appeal judge ruled claims can be made up to six years after a flight delay.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 20th June 2014

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off