‘The county court has responded rapidly to the sudden and unprecedented change to its working practices. However, the move to remote hearings has brought a marked decline in the retention of existing listings. Many litigants have found their hearings adjourned by the court even when those hearings were, on the face of it, suitable for hearing remotely.’
3PB, 12th May 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘A judge was wrong to refuse adjourning a trial where one of the litigants injured his back just before the hearing and needed an emergency operation, the High Court has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 5th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘In the challenging and constraining times imposed by the Covid-19 pandemic, it can be difficult to comply with case management directions. Although the parties may agree extensions of time of up to 56 days if they do not imperil a hearing date, applications continue to be necessary where the extension may impact on a court hearing.’
Parklane Plowden Chambers, 28th April 2020
Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has handed down rulings in the first two appeals relating to the welfare of children to have reached the court on the issue of remote hearings during the COVID-19 pandemic.’
Local Government Lawyer, 30th April 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The Chief Coroner Guidance (numbers 34 and 35) has made it clear, as with other jurisdictions, that no physical hearing should take place unless it is urgent and essential business and it is safe for those involved.’
Parklane Plowden, 24th April 2020
Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk
‘In Municipo de Mariana & Ors v BHP Group PLC & Ors ([2020] EWHC 928 (TCC)) His Honour Judge Eyre QC set out the principles to be applied by the Court when considering applications to extend time for compliance with directions or for the adjournment of hearings in the context of the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. These principles provide a helpful framework for parties seeking to make such applications.’
Henderson Chambers, 24th April 2020
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘The High Court has rejected an application to adjourn a five-week trial of a £250m insolvency claim because of the coronavirus pandemic.’
Litigation Futures, 9th April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The High Court has provided a comprehensive summary, in the case of Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) V Avacade Ltd & Ores [2020] EWHC 26, of the relevant authorities when it comes to applying for an adjournment on the grounds of ill-health.’
St Ives Chambers, 6th February 2020
Source: www.stiveschambers.co.uk
‘The occasionally dramatic if sprawling medical tribunal of the former British Cycling and Team Sky doctor Richard Freeman, which was due to be done and dusted last March, may not finish now until October 2020 after being adjourned yet again.’
The Guardian, 16th December 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Judges have been warned by the Court of Appeal not to adjourn final decisions in family cases simply to “press the pause button”.’
Law Society's Gazette, 23rd September 2019
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘A deputy master hearing a probate dispute in the High Court said the way litigants in person ran their defence justified a decision not to adjourn the case so they could instruct new lawyers.’
Litigation Futures, 20th September 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The medical tribunal of the former Team Sky and British Cycling doctor Richard Freeman, which was due to hear charges that he purchased 30 sachets of banned testosterone for an unnamed rider, has been adjourned and will not be heard until later this year at the earliest.’
The Guardian, 5th March 2019
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A High Court judge was wrong to order a defendant to make a £1m security for costs payment – almost the sum the claimant was seeking – to rely on a witness statement it had served late, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 18th February 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Oduneye v Brent London Borough Council (2018) EWCA Civ 1595. This was a second appeal from a s.204 appeal on Brent’s decision that Ms O was intentionally homeless. Ms O was in person. She had sought an adjournment to seek legal representation but this was a fortnight before the hearing and refused on the basis that she had known of the appeal hearing since permission on 21 October 2017.’
Nearly Legal, 10th July 2018
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Challenges to a failure to adjourn seem to be popping-up at the moment. There was the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Solanki v (1) Intercity Telecom Ltd (2) Guidinglight Finance Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 101 – where a judge had failed to give adequate reasons for rejecting medical evidence justifying an adjournment. By contrast, in the recent decision of Lindsay v Solicitors’ Regulatory Authority [2018] EWHC 1275 (Admin), the respondent in misconduct proceedings failed to advance adequate evidence to support such an application. What lies deeper beneath, however, is whether an appeal against a decision not to adjourn requires the appellate court or tribunal to consider whether the original decision lay within the range of reasonable responses open to the decision maker below or, alternatively, has to determine the question of fairness / correctness itself.’
UK Police Law Blog, 15th June 2018
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
‘When must a police misconduct hearing adjourn the proceedings for the attendance of the respondent officer or even a witness?’
UK Police Law Blog, 9th February 2018
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
‘The inquests of four people who died in the Grenfell Tower fire were opened at Westminster coroner’s court on Wednesday.’
The Guardian, 23rd August 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024