Category: civil procedure rules

Statement regarding defamation cases – Judiciary of England and Wales

Posted January 10th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, defamation, press releases by tracey

‘During the passage of the Bill that became the Defamation Act 2013, Parliament discussed procedural changes to assist with the implementation of the legislation and the policy underlying it. The Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC) has now made the rule changes. However, as these have not been as extensive as members of Parliament may have anticipated, I am issuing this statement to provide some clarification and reassurance to Parliament and others…’

Full statement

Judiciary of England and Wales, 2nd January 2014

Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk

MacLennan v Morgan Sindall (Infrastructure) plc – WLR Daily

Posted January 9th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, evidence, law reports, news, witnesses by sally

MacLennan v Morgan Sindall (Infrastructure) plc [2013] EWHC 4044 (QB); [2013] WLR (D) 509

‘The power to prohibit the calling of witnesses under CPR r 32.2(3) sat towards the more extreme end of the court’s powers and was a power to be considered after less intrusive measures had been considered and rejected.’

WLR Daily, 17th December 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Sanctions update – Mitchell in Action – Sovereign Chambers

Posted January 7th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, news, sanctions, time limits by sally

‘The facts and consequences of Mitchell are now well known, if not notorious amongst those conducting civil ligation.’

Full story

Sovereign Chambers, 7th January 2014

Source: www.sovereignchambers.co.uk

What comes first – Mitchell ruling or part 36? – Litigtation Futures

Posted December 19th, 2013 in budgets, civil procedure rules, news, part 36 offers by tracey

‘The questions raised by the Mitchell ruling, such as the effect on a part 36 offer of a budget being disallowed, are already emerging as the impact of the Court of Appeal’s decision is felt. Barrister Barry Havenhand of Clerksroom has supplied Litigation Futures with details of one case where the failure to file a budget in sufficient time saw the defendant’s budget restricted to its court fees, as in Mitchell.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 17th December 2013

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

High Court refuses relief after bid to serve late witness statement but issues “note of caution” – Litigation Futures

Posted December 19th, 2013 in civil procedure rules, news, time limits, witnesses by tracey

‘The High Court has issued guidance on how to serve late witness statements in certain circumstances without falling foul of the Mitchell ruling, after refusing relief from sanction when a party tried to do just that on the first day of trial.’

Full story

Litigtation Futures, 19th December 2013

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Exclusive: High Court grants first post-Mitchell relief from sanctions – Litigation Futures

Posted December 13th, 2013 in civil procedure rules, news, time limits by sally

‘The relationship between justice and procedure “has not changed so as to transform rules and rule compliance into trip wires”, the High Court said this week in the first significant post-Mitchell ruling where relief from sanctions was granted.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 13th December 2013

Source: www.litigation.com

This month’s costs cases summaries: appeals, unjust enrichment and Mitchell – Litigation Futures

Posted December 10th, 2013 in appeals, budgets, case management, civil procedure rules, costs, litigants in person, news by tracey

‘Our monthly summary of key costs-related court decisions.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 9th December 2013

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Smith v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change – WLR Daily

Posted December 9th, 2013 in appeals, civil procedure rules, disclosure, employment, government departments, health & safety, jurisdiction, law reports, practice directions by sally

Smith v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change [2013] EWCA Civ 1585; [2013] WLR (D) 473

‘In order for the court to have jurisdiction to make an order under CPR r 31.16 for disclosure before proceedings had started, it was not a requirement that the applicant have an arguable case in those proceedings.’

WLR Daily, 5th December 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted December 6th, 2013 in appeals, budgets, case management, civil procedure rules, law reports, media by tracey

Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd: [2013] EWCA Civ 1537;   [2013] WLR (D)  466

‘In the context of the court’s case management powers in respect of a party’s claim, the failure by the party to file a costs budget on time would not normally attract relief from the sanction imposed by CPR r 3.14 unless the default were trivial or there were a good reason for it.’

WLR Daily, 27th November 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

David Partington’s unique take on the Mitchell decision – Sovereign Chambers

Posted December 3rd, 2013 in appeals, budgets, civil procedure rules, costs, news by sally

‘The ramifications of “Plebgate” rumble on, not merely in the corridors of Whitehall and “the Met.” Much more seriously (some would say) it has now impinged into the arena of the “Jackson Reforms” and sanctions for relief against failure to abide by the Civil Procedure Rules in general. Andrew Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Limited (citation above) took place in the context of costs budgeting and the failure to provide the necessary budget in time, but it is also an important case with wider implications concerning the approach of the court to failures to comply with orders or directions of the Court or procedures of the CPR post “Jackson”. Many practitioners will be alarmed by the result.’

Full story

Sovereign Chambers, 28th November 2013

Source: www.sovereignchambers.co.uk

Ramifications of the Mitchell Costs Appeal – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted December 3rd, 2013 in appeals, budgets, civil procedure rules, costs, news, solicitors by sally

‘There have been lots of sound bites from today’s costs and CPR compliance judgment dismissing the appeal in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Limited [2013] EWCA Civ 1526. Other articles will detail the Court’s findings, although I suggest it would be negligent for any civil litigator not to read the entire judgment. It is the most far-reaching decision in civil litigation since the introduction of the CPR in 1999. I plan to analyse the consequences (and unintended consequences) for litigators, the Courts and civil litigation generally. My initial tweet was: “Mitchell costs appeal dismissed. Check your insurance policies litigators. The CPR alligators are coming and this time they’re hungry!” Here are my views, not limited to 140 characters.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 27th November 2013

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

For Whom the Bell Tolls – NearlyLegal

Posted November 29th, 2013 in civil procedure rules, costs, documents, news by sally

“This is a brief note on an important Court of Appeal judgement. Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd is actually a defamation case but it is an essential point of reference for anybody involved in civil litigation.”

Full story

NearlyLegal, 28th November 2013

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

District judges taking hardline approach to Jackson enforcement – Litigation Futures

Posted November 19th, 2013 in appeals, civil procedure rules, disclosure, judiciary, news, striking out by sally

“An increasing number of reports are emerging of hardline decisions by district judges over non-compliance with the CPR or breach of orders and directions.”

Full story

Litigation Futures, 19th November 2013

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Breathing a sigh of relief…? – Zenith Chambers

Posted October 30th, 2013 in appeals, civil procedure rules, costs, enforcement, news, practice directions by sally

“By the Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2013 CPR r. 3.9 was substantially amended with effect from 1st April 2013. The ‘new’ rule reads as follows:
‘3.9 (1) On an application for relief from any sanction imposed for a failure to comply with any rule, practice direction or court order, the court will consider all the circumstances of the case, so as to enable it to deal justly with the application, including the need –
(a) for litigation to be conducted efficiently and at proportionate cost; and
(b) to enforce compliance with rules, practice directions and orders.
(2) An application for relief must be supported by evidence.'”

Full story (PDF)

Zenith Chambers, 25th October 2013

Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk

Jackson: 6 months on – Zenith Chambers

Posted October 30th, 2013 in appeals, budgets, civil procedure rules, claims management, costs, news, time limits by sally

“It is now almost 6 months since the Brave New World of Jackson. This article considers the impact of the reforms and stated ‘culture change’.”

Full story (PDF)

Zenith Chambers, 25th October 2013

Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk

Jackson: six months on – New Law Journal

Posted October 30th, 2013 in appeals, budgets, civil procedure rules, claims management, costs, news, time limits by sally

“Dominic Regan serves up a survival guide.”

Full story

New Law Journal, 29th October 2013

Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk

Secretary of State for Health and others v Servier Laboratories Ltd and others National Grid Electricity Transmission plc v ABB Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Posted October 25th, 2013 in appeals, civil procedure rules, crime, disclosure, EC law, evidence, foreign jurisdictions, law reports by sally

Secretary of State for Health and others v Servier Laboratories Ltd and others
National Grid Electricity Transmission plc v ABB Ltd and others [2013] EWCA Civ 1234 ; [2013] WLR (D) 401

“It was not mandatory for the court to make use of Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 in order to obtain information or disclosure from a party to litigation from another member state, notwithstanding that compliance with an order made by the court under CPR Pt 18 or Pt 31 might expose the party to a risk of criminal prosecution in that member state.”

WLR Daily, 22nd October 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

The House That Jackson Built – Zenith Chambers

Posted October 15th, 2013 in budgets, civil procedure rules, disclosure, housing, news, witnesses by sally

“It is now almost 6 months since the Brave New World of Jackson. This article considers the impact (if any) the reforms and stated ‘culture change’ have had, and are likely to have, upon those practising housing law.”

Full story

Zenith Chambers, 15th October 2013

Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk

Fairclough v Summers – An abuse of Process – Sovereign Chambers

Posted October 8th, 2013 in abuse of process, appeals, civil procedure rules, damages, fraud, news, personal injuries, striking out by sally

“On the 13th May 2003 whilst acting in the course of his employment with Fairclough Homes Limited (‘Fairclough’), Shaun Summers (‘Mr Summers’) fell from a truck and sustained both a fractured bone in his right hand and a fractured left heel bone. On the 28th October 2003 Fairclough admitted liability for the accident through its insurers (‘the admission’). Mr Summers went on to issue a claim for personal injury and associated losses on the 10th May 2006 but, having examined his medical records (which appeared to cast doubt on Mr Summers’ account of the accident), Fairclough applied for permission to withdraw their admission and served an Amended Defence in relation to liability. On the 28th August 2007, following a trial before HHJ Tetlow (‘the Judge’), Mr Summers obtained judgment against Fairclough with damages to be assessed.”

Full story

Sovereign Chambers, 25th September 2013

Source: www.sovereignchambers.co.uk

Binns and another v Firstplus Financial Group plc – WLR Daily

Posted October 1st, 2013 in abuse of process, civil procedure rules, costs, dispute resolution, insurance, law reports, striking out by sally

Binns and another v Firstplus Financial Group plc [2013] EWHC 2436 (QB); [2013] WLR (D) 361

“Where a claimant had obtained an award pursuant to alternative dispute resolution (‘ADR’) and subsequently brought a civil claim where the only potential advantage in bringing that litigation was the possibility of an additional award in respect of legal costs, the claim was to be struck out under CPR r 3.4(2).”

WLR Daily, 24th July 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk