civil procedure rules – Page 34

Permission to file a respondent’s notice out of time not prevented by Mitchell – The Barristers’ Hub

Posted November 4th, 2014 in appeals, civil procedure rules, news, sanctions, time limits by sally

‘The recent decision in the case of Altomart Limited v Salford Estates (No. 2) Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 1408 gave the Court of Appeal a further opportunity to revisit the issues raised in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd. It provided further indication of how the court is now more willing to grant relief from sanction where such refusal would lead to a potential injustice in the face of little prejudice being caused by the breach.’

Full story

The Barristers’ Hub, 31st October 2014

Source: www.barristershub.co.uk

Altomart Ltd v Salford Estates (No 2) Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted October 31st, 2014 in case management, civil procedure rules, law reports, service, time limits by sally

Altomart Ltd v Salford Estates (No 2) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1408; [2014] WLR (D) 451

‘An application under CPR r 3.1(2)(a) for an extension of time in which to file a respondent’s notice was by analogy subject to the robust approach to compliance with rules set down by the Court of Appeal in relation to applications for relief from sanction under CPR r 3.9.’

WLR Daily, 29th October 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Service by the courts – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted October 27th, 2014 in appeals, case management, civil procedure rules, claims management, interpretation, limitations, news, race discrimination, service, solicitors by sally

‘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

Relief From Sanctions – Watch it! – Zenith PI Blog

Posted October 23rd, 2014 in civil procedure rules, news, sanctions, time limits by sally

‘After the turbulence of the past year, provoked primarily by the Mitchell case [2014] 1WLR 795, we all surely know about relief from sanctions – but do we?’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 22nd October 2014

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Companies should not wait to apply to set aside default judgments, says expert, after court makes clear ‘Mitchell’ principles apply – OUT-LAW.com

Posted October 23rd, 2014 in appeals, civil procedure rules, default judgments, delay, news, setting aside by sally

‘Companies hoping to have a default judgment against them set aside must be sure to act quickly, an expert has said, after a recent court decision confirmed what courts must consider when considering an application.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 22nd October 2014

Source: www.out-law.com

Tchenguiz v Director of the Serious Fraud Office and others – WLR DAily

Posted October 17th, 2014 in appeals, civil procedure rules, fraud, law reports, practice directions, skeleton arguments by tracey

Tchenguiz v Director of the Serious Fraud Office and others: [2014] EWCA Civ 1333; [2014] WLR (D) 427

‘It was very difficult for the Court of Appeal to deal with the dispatch of its business if it was faced with excessively lengthy skeleton arguments. What was required was a careful and concise summary of the points that were intended to be addressed.’

WLR Daily, 13th October 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Relief from Sanctions in the Employment Tribunal – Six Pump Court

Posted October 8th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, employment tribunals, news by sally

‘This article explores the relevance of the Civil Procedure Rules (“CPR”) rules pertaining to relief from sanctions to Employment Tribunal proceedings.’

Full story

Six Pump Court, 6th October 2014

Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk

Part 36: All change please – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted September 24th, 2014 in appeals, civil procedure rules, costs, indemnities, news by sally

‘Just when you thought you had got to grips with the updated Part 36 rules and post Jackson benefits, the Civil Procedure Rule Committee announced it was considering reforms to Part 36.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 15th September 2014

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Changes to Practice Direction 21 – Material to be Served and Filed in Relation to Child/Protected Party Settlement Claims – Zenith PI Blog

Posted September 23rd, 2014 in children, civil procedure rules, news, practice directions, service by sally

‘With the 75th Update to the Civil Procedure Rules (coming into force 1 October 2014), amendments to Practice Direction 21 (Children and Protected Parties) address the inconsistencies between the rules and practice direction in respect of the material that must be served and filed in relation to child/protected party settlement claims.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 23rd September 2014

Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com

Fern Computer Consultancy Ltd v Intergraph Cadworx & Analysis Solutions Inc – WLR Daily

Posted September 22nd, 2014 in agency, civil procedure rules, compensation, contracts, law reports, practice directions, service out of jurisdiction by sally

Fern Computer Consultancy Ltd v Intergraph Cadworx & Analysis Solutions Inc [2014] EWHC 2908 (Ch); [2014] WLR (D) 400

‘A claim brought under regulation 17 of the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 for compensation on determination of an agency agreement was not in respect of a contract or a breach of contract. Accordingly, the jurisdictional gateways for service out of the jurisdiction in paragraph 3.1(6) and (7) of Practice Direction 6B supplementing CPR Pt 6 did not apply.’

WLR Daily, 29th August 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Jackson slaps down bid to introduce one-way costs-shifting in certain appeals – Litigation Futures

Posted September 16th, 2014 in appeals, civil procedure rules, costs, news by tracey

‘The Jackson reforms were not intended to give appeal courts the ad hoc power to introduce one-way costs shifting, their architect has ruled. Lord Justice Jackson said he wanted to clarify the purpose of rule 52.9A – introduced on 1 April 2013 – so as to prevent further applications along the same lines.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 16th September 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Practice Note: Chancery Chambers Changes 1st October 2014 – Judiciary of England and Wales

Posted September 15th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, courts, documents, electronic filing, expert witnesses, internet, practice directions, witnesses by tracey

‘From 1 October 2014 the Chancery Division in London will commence using the new CE-File electronic court file and some data stored on the old IT system will be transferred to CE-File.’

Full practice note

Judiciary of England and Wales, 11th September 2014

Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk

Wagenaar v Weekend Travel Ltd (t/a Ski Weekend) and another – WLR Daily

Posted September 12th, 2014 in appeals, civil procedure rules, costs, damages, indemnities, law reports, personal injuries, ultra vires by tracey

Wagenaar v Weekend Travel Ltd (t/a Ski Weekend) and another; [2014] EWCA Civ 1105; [2014] WLR (D) 389

‘The qualified one-way costs shifting provisions under CPR 44.13 and 44.14 were not ultra vires the general discretion of the court on the ordering of costs under section 51(1) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, and although applying to claims for damages for personal injuries brought by a claimant against a defendant, they did not apply to claims for an indemnity or contribution brought by such a defendant against a third party.’

WLR Daily, 31st July 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

High Court: Commercial Agents Regulations could not override contractual choice of law – OUT-LAW.com

Posted September 10th, 2014 in agency, civil procedure rules, claims management, commercial agents, contracts, EC law, news by sally

‘Mandatory rules governing the relationship between commercial agents and their principals in respect of the agent’s UK activities cannot override a valid jurisdiction and choice of law clause, the High Court has ruled.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 10th September 2014

Source: www.out-law.com

Carter-Ruck granted relief from sanctions after solicitor “misread” CPR – Litigation Futures

Posted August 22nd, 2014 in case management, civil procedure rules, costs, news, solicitors, time limits by tracey

‘The High Court this week granted libel specialists Carter-Ruck relief from sanctions after an assistant solicitor “misread” the Civil Procedure Rules and was almost four months late in sending out a funding notice.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 22nd August 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Claimant lawyers hit back over “cynical” part 36 offers – Litigation Futures

Posted August 20th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, costs, damages, negligence, news, part 36 offers, personal injuries, solicitors by tracey

‘The Forum of Complex Injury Lawyers (FOCIS) has hit back after a report for the Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) recommended that part 36 should be reformed, partly to discourage claimant lawyers from making “cynical” offers.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 20th August 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Rule committee backs part 36 reforms – Litigation Futures

Posted August 19th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, news, part 36 offers by tracey

‘The Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) is to consider how part 36 can be reformed – to simplify it, allow offers by counterclaiming defendants and discourage “cynical” claimant offers.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 19th August 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims 2014 – Civil Justice Council

Posted August 18th, 2014 in case management, civil justice, civil procedure rules, disciplinary procedures, expert witnesses, fees, news, practice directions, solicitors by tracey

‘Civil Justice Council issues new guidance on instructing experts in civil claims.’

Full guidance

Civil Justice Council, 13th August 2014

Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk

High Court: making defendant pay 10% more for rejecting part 36 offer would add “penal element” – Litigation Futures

Posted August 13th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, costs, injunctions, news, part 36 offers, penalties by sally

‘A High Court judge has ruled that making a defendant who rejected a part 36 offer pay an additional 10% of the sum awarded for costs would introduce a “penal element” and be unjust.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 13th August 2014

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Witness statements, Mitchell and CPR rules 3.9 and 32.10 – Sovereign Chambers

Posted August 7th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, evidence, news, time limits, trials, witnesses by sally

‘David Partington and Judy Dawson, barristers in the Sovereign Chambers Civil Team in Leeds, consider the civil procedural difficulties that the late service of witness statements cause for both the defaulting and innocent parties, given the interplay of, “Jackson”, Denton, and the cases dealing with sanction for late service of witness statements.’

Full story

Sovereign Chambers, 16th July 2014

Source: www.sovereignchambers.co.uk