High Court finds abuse of process in how law firm sued fellow solicitors – Legal Futures

Posted January 8th, 2016 in abuse of process, fees, law firms, limitations, negligence, news by tracey

‘The High Court has found a Newcastle law firm’s conduct an abuse of process after it repeatedly failed to pay the proper court fees when it issued claims.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 8th January 2016

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

A scandal unfolds: High Court enforcement again – Nearly Legal

‘In our last post, we dealt with the issue of an application for a High Court writ being made in tenant possession cases by way of form N293A. To recap, this is the form which expressly states “This judgment or order has been sent to the High Court for enforcement by (Writ of Possession against trespassers) only”.’

Full story

Nearly Legal, 6th January 2016

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

Lewis and others v Ward Hadaway (a firm) – WLR Daily

Posted January 6th, 2016 in abuse of process, fees, law firms, law reports, limitations, negligence, solicitors by sally

Lewis and others v Ward Hadaway (a firm) [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 551

‘In determining whether a party had properly brought a claim before the court so as to stop the clock for limitation purposes, the requirement that the form be accompanied by the “appropriate fee” was not satisfied in circumstances where the act of payment of the fee was in itself an abuse of process. In such circumstances, the claim had not properly been brought and time continued to run for limitation purposes.’

WLR Daily, 21st December 2015

Source: www..iclr.co.uk

Dickinson and another v UK Acorn Finance Ltd – WLR Daily

Dickinson and another v UK Acorn Finance Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1194; [2015] WLR (D) 479

‘The fact that a loan the subject of litigation was rendered unenforceable by statute did not mean that a judge was not entitled to determine whether it would be an abuse of process for a party to proceed with its submission that it would be an abuse of process for another party to be permitted to proceed with its claim which was founded on that loan.’

WLR Daily, 25th November 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Air freight damages claim struck out as “irresponsible” and lacking in authority – Zenith Chambers

Posted November 12th, 2015 in abuse of process, airlines, class actions, damages, news, striking out by sally

‘The High Court has struck out claims against British Airways for damages allegedly arising from the air freight cartel on the basis of lack of authority. The claim was issued on behalf of 64,697 claimants, all members of the Chinese Chamber of International Commerce (CCOIC), an organisation that issues certificates of origin when goods are exported from China.’

Full story

Zenith Chambers, 2nd November 2015

Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk

High Court throws out 65,000 ‘highly irresponsible’ price-fixing claims – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted October 29th, 2015 in abuse of process, airlines, appeals, class actions, news, price fixing, striking out by sally

‘The High Court has thrown out almost 65,000 claims brought on behalf of Chinese businesses after finding the firm acting had no authority to do so.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 27th October 2015

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Thresholds for strike-out – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted October 19th, 2015 in abuse of process, civil procedure rules, costs, fraud, law firms, news, striking out by sally

‘The Court of Appeal in Alpha Rocks Solicitors v Benjamin Oluwadare Alade [2015] EWCA Civ 685 dealt with the issue of when it was appropriate to strike out a claim on the grounds that the claimant has abused the process of the court.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 19th October 2015

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

High Court refers immigration solicitors to SRA after five “hopeless” judicial reviews – Legal Futures

Posted September 11th, 2015 in abuse of process, immigration, judicial review, law firms, news by tracey

‘The High Court has referred an immigration practice to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority after reviewing five “hopeless” judicial reviews, each of which had already been deemed to be an abuse of process.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 11th September 2015

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Government should address core Libya rendition allegations, judge rules – The Guardian

‘The government should address the core allegations of 12 claimants who say they were kidnapped, tortured, subject to control orders or tricked into travelling to Libya where they were detained or mistreated, a high court judge has said.’

Full story

The Guardian, 1st July 2015

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

After settlement of a claim for asbestos-related disease against two employers, is it an abuse of process to bring a claim for mesothelioma against a third employer two and a half years later? – Zenith PI Blog

Posted March 31st, 2015 in abuse of process, asbestos, industrial injuries, limitations, news by sally

‘The High Court decision in Lloyd v Humphreys and Glasgow Ltd [2015] EWHC 525 (QB) handed down on 20.3.2015 considers if there was abuse of process in those circumstances. It is also a useful example of the Court’s willingness to exercise its discretion under section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 30th March 2015

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

High Court considers purpose behind subject access request under the DPA – Panopticon

‘It is not uncommon for data controllers to be faced with subject access requests under s. 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 the motivations for which appear to have nothing whatever to do with the purposes of the DPA. The DPA seeks to protect individuals’ privacy rights with respect to data which is processed about them. The subject access provisions help people check up on that data and its processing (see for example YS v Minister voor Immigratie (Cases C-141/12 & C-372/12)). In practice, however, a subject access request is a fishing expedition with an eye on prospective litigation.’

Full story

Panopticon, 10th March 2015

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Regina v Akhtar (Itzaz) – WLR Daily

Regina v Akhtar (Itzaz) [2015] EWCA Crim 176; [2015] WLR (D) 91

‘Where a jury brought in a guilty verdict on one count but were unable to agree on another count, a retrial on that other count was not an abuse of process unless the two counts were true alternatives in that they were mutually exclusive alternatives.’

WLR Daily, 26th February 2015

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Chai v Peng Undermining the purpose of “forum conveniens?” – Family Law Week

Posted December 15th, 2014 in abuse of process, appeals, divorce, estoppel, jurisdiction, news, stay of proceedings by tracey

‘Tim Scott QC, Peter Duckworth and James Pullen, all of 29 Bedford Row who represented Dr Kay Peng Khoo in Chai v Peng, analyse the proceedings to date.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 11th December 2014

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

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

You’ve got absoutely nothing out of this – NearlyLegal

Posted September 1st, 2014 in abuse of process, banking, contracts, costs, housing, indemnities, mortgages, news, repossession by sally

‘For most parties that enter into litigation (save for those on CFAs and some who are legally aided) a win isn’t really a win unless the other side is also ordered to pay your costs. I say most, because certain litigants enter into litigation knowing that come what May their costs will be paid on the indemnity basis. They have the foresight (or more accurately the power) to draft contracts which provide that, in the event of litigation, the other side (often a borrower or a long leaseholder) will indemnify them for all their legal costs irrespective of whether they win or lose.’

Full story

NearlyLegal, 31st August 2014

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

‘On-the-run’ scheme flawed but not unlawful, inquiry finds – The Guardian

‘The post-Troubles scheme devised to reassure Irish republican “on-the-runs” (OTRs) that they were no longer wanted by the police was lawful and did not give terrorist suspects an amnesty, an independent review has concluded.’

Full story

The Guardian, 17th July 2014

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

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

Regina v Clayton – WLR Daily

Posted May 29th, 2014 in abuse of process, appeals, enforcement, law reports, planning by michael

Regina v Clayton [2014] EWCA Crim 1030;  [2014] WLR (D)  231

‘Where there was information suggesting that an enforcement notice should not have been issued, a prosecution for breach of the notice was not open to challenge as an abuse of process because that would involve a challenge to the validity of the enforcement notice and such a challenge could be mounted only on appeal or by way of judicial review.’

WLR Daily, 23rd May 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Abu Hamza – the ten-year battle – Halsbury’s Law Exchange

‘It is worth considering two important legal judgments that the ten-year battle to extradite him involved.’

Full story

Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 20th May 2014

Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk

Secretary of State for the Home Department v Mohamed (formerly CC); Same v CF – WLR Daily

Secretary of State for the Home Department v Mohamed (formerly CC); Same v CF; [2014] EWCA Civ 559; [2014] WLR (D) 187

‘Suspected terrorists subject to control orders and terrorism prevention and investigation measures who brought proceedings for abuse of process relating to the manner in which they were removed to the United Kingdom from Somaliland were entitled to see the Secretary of State’s objections to their case for alleged collusion and mistreatment. The Secretary of State was not permitted to confine reasons for rejecting their case on those issues to a closed judgment. The applicants and the public should not be denied all knowledge of the extent to which their factual and/or legal case was accepted or rejected. Such a total denial offended justice and propriety.’

WLR Daily, 2nd May 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk