“It seemed a fairly straightforward hearing – a pre-trial review in an anti-social behaviour possession claim prior to a one-day trial at the end of December – with both my opponent and I agreeing that the matter was ready to proceed.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 30th December 2012
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.2) Rules 2012 came into force on 1st October 2012. These Amendments cover many aspects of the CPR. This article only considers those amendments which a housing practitioner is likely to encounter.”
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 27th November 2012
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
“Amina Somers, a consultant and mediator with Goodman Ray, asks whether the implementation of the Family Justice Review recommendations will see the court usurped by mediation as the primary dispute resolution process following relationship breakdown.”
Family Law Week, 26th November 2012
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“CPR r 36.13(2) did not permit the court to be told the position as to a Part 36 offer and consequently go on to deal with the question of costs at the conclusion of the first part of a split trial.”
WLR Daily, 9th October 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Arif v Zar and another [2012] EWCA Civ 986; [2012] WLR (D) 239
“In relation to a bankruptcy order, the court sitting in bankruptcy had to give consideration to the possibility that a person might attempt to use the protection of the order as a shield against the claims of their spouse for ancillary relief. Where there was credible evidence of that the court ought not to be afraid to use its powers to order full disclosure and to require the attendance and cross-examination of witnesses where necessary in order properly and fairly to determine an annulment application. The question of whether it was right to transfer an annulment application to be heard alongside an ancillary relief application in the Family Division depended upon the facts and was a matter of discretion for the registrar or judge asked to transfer it.”
WLR Daily, 18th July 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“In statutory appeals to the Court of Appeal from the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), if the appeal had been allowed by consent, with the appellant obtaining the remittal sought, or if the appeal had been resolved by the grant of a status which was not previously offered, then provided the appellant was clearly identifiable as the successful party, CPR r 44.3(2(a) would usually entitle him to his costs absent specific matters of conduct or other features making an order inappropriate. The crucial question in such cases was the identification of the successful party.”
WLR Daily, 30th May 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Adams and others v Ford and others [2012] EWCA Civ 544; [2012] WLR (D) 125
“It was not right to lay down a categorical rule that the issue of proceedings without valid authority from a claimant ought necessarily to amount to an abuse of the process of the court. The principle in Presentaciones Musicales SA v Secunda [1994] Ch 271, that a claimant could ratify and adopt proceedings started in his name by a solicitor without authority, remained binding on the court.”
WLR Daily, 26th April 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The interrelation between a party’s right to apply to set aside an order made in his absence and his right to appeal is one of recognised difficulty. Until recently, it had received little attention: a decision at first instance in Tennero Ltd v Arnold [2007] 1 WLR 1025 and one on appeal in Attorney General of Zambia v Meer Care & Desai [2008] EWCA Civ 754 (the ‘Boutique Basile’ case). In 2011, however, the Court of Appeal had cause to reconsider the interplay of Civil Procedure Rules (‘CPR’) 39.3 and 52 in Bank of Scotland plc v Pereira [2011] EWCA Civ 241 [2011] 1 WLR 2391.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 10th April 2012
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
Secretary of State for the Home Department v CB and another [2012] EWCA Civ 418; [2012] WLR (D) 112
“Where a court made a non-derogating control order in proceedings against a person under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005, it had no jurisdiction to order a permanent stay of such proceedings under the Act nor under its case management powers in the Civil Procedure Rules, unless the controlled person requested such a course of action.”
WLR Daily, 3rd April 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
DKH Retail Ltd v Republic (Retail) Ltd [2012] EWHC 877 (Ch); [2012] WLR (D) 109
“The current practice, in which applications to transfer cases to and from the Patents County Court were handled by judges of the court from which the case was to be transferred, was correct and in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules.”
WLR Daily, 3rd April 2012
Soure: www.iclr.co.uk
Environmental and planning law newsletter (PDF)
Thirty Nine Essex Street, March 2012
Source: www.39essex.com
Simcoe v Jacuzzi UK Group plc [2012] EWCA Civ 137; [2012] WLR (D) 35
“The date from which interest ran on an award of costs in the county court in favour of a successful litigant was, by reason of article 2 of the County Court (Interest on Judgment Debts) Order 1991, the date the order for costs was made, not the date on which costs were assessed or agreed. The discretion granted in making an award of costs by CPR r 40.8 did not apply and was ineffective in that court.”
WLR Daily, 16th February 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Byron James, barrister, 14 Gray’s Inn Square reviews the guidance arising from the latest case law concerning applications for leave to appeal in financial remedies orders in the High Court.”
Family Law Week, 8th February 2012
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
Revenue and Customs Commissioners v GKN Group [2012] EWCA Civ 57; [2012] WLR (D) 15
“On an application for an interim payment under CPR r 25.7(1)(c) a claimant had to satisfy the court on a balance of probabilities that, on the material available to the court, he would succeed at trial in obtaining judgment from the defendant for a substantial amount of money. It was not sufficient to show that it was likely that he would succeed.”
WLR Daily, 31st January 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Jackson reforms will cost the taxpayer more than £70m a year in employers’ liability cases, according a report prepared by economists.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 23rd November 2011
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
Achieving A Culture Change In Case Management (PDF)
Speech by Lord Justice Jackson
Fifth Lecture in the Implementation Programme, 22nd November 2011
Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk
“Lord Justice Jackson has stressed that lawyers need to embrace his proposed reforms of case management if the necessary ‘culture change’ he envisages is to be realised.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 22nd November 2011
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“If it comes to a David v Goliath battle, the City has the big bludgeons, but Occupy London’s slings could still win the day.”
The Guardian, 2nd November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
SSL International plc and another v TTK LIG Ltd and others [2011] EWCA Civ 1170; [2011] WLR (D) 299
“Service of a claim form on the director of a foreign company during his temporary visit to England did not constitute personal service of the claim form on the company, within CPR r 6.5(3)(b), where the company was neither resident nor carried on business in England and all its directors were resident overseas when the proceedings were purportedly served.”
WLR Daily, 19th October 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“New rules and developments in Part 36.”
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 10th October 2011
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024