‘A former Crufts winner has been banned from keeping dogs for life after more than 30 animals were found living in “disgraceful” conditions at her home.’
Daily Telegraph, 20th June 2017
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The Civil Procedure Rule Committee may need to address a hole in the exception from qualified one-way costs-shifting (QOCS) that meant defendants in a personal injury claim could not seek their costs because service of the claim had been set aside, rather than struck out, a High Court judge has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 19th June 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The London Borough of Islington has secured a £3,000-plus costs order in its favour after a judge found that landlords had “behaved unreasonably in bringing an appeal which they never intended to pursue properly and never did pursue properly”.’
Local Government Lawyer, 19th June 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The supreme court has ruled that women from Northern Ireland are not entitled to free access to abortions on the NHS, a decision that was condemned by campaigners as a “further blow to women” from the region.’
The Guardian, 14th June 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A City trader has successfully challenged a divorce judgment awarding her ex-husband of four years £2.7m – in a decision that family lawyers warn raises more questions than it answers.’
Law Society's Gazette, 13th June 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The High Court has allowed for trial of a preliminary issue in a case concerning the limits of a damages based agreement (DBA).’
Law Society's Gazette, 13th June 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘A High Court judge has described as “absurd” the conduct of parties in an employment dispute that produced thousands of pages in bundles – but only referred to 100 of them – and skeleton arguments more than seven times the expected length.’
Litigation Futures, 14th June 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A local authority was required to give credit to leaseholders for funds received from third-parties when recovering a contribution to the cost of major works.’
Tanfield Chambers, 1st June 2017
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘The longest and most expensive case brought in the history of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has ended with high-profile claimant lawyer Martyn Day, two of his colleagues and his firm Leigh Day fully exonerated.’
Legal Futures, 9th June 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘James E. Petts sets out some key considerations for local authorities looking to recover their costs.’
Local Government Lawyer, 9th June 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
In re RBS rights issue litigation (No 2) [2017] EWHC 1217 (Ch)
‘Subsequent to the defendant bank and its directors having learnt of the identity of the third party funders of the claimants following a successful application made under CPR r 25.14, the defendants sought security for costs pursuant to CPR r 25.14(2)(b) against those funders. That application was prompted by settlements with some of the original claimants, as a result of which the remaining claimants’ exposure to adverse costs increased, and by the defendants learning that the claimants did not have adequate after-the-event (“ATE”) insurance cover in place. The first respondent, a commercial funder and British Virgin Islands entity, opposed the application on the grounds that: (a) its financial position was such that it would be well able to meet any award for costs and in any event the defendants had not demonstrated that the claimants would fail to meet a costs award against them; and (b) the application was made extremely late and therefore caused it and the claimants real prejudice. The second respondent, an Isle of Man entity that was not in the business of litigation funding and provided funding close to the eve of trial, opposed the application on the grounds that: (a) it was unlikely that a section 51 order would be made against it in due course; and (b) no security was justified or necessary on the evidence and the timing was oppressive. Both respondents also argued that: (c) the quantum of security sought was excessive.’
WLR Daily, 23rd May 2017
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The president of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has reproached the Law Society for a “deeply unimpressive” explanation of its failure to disclose all the documents it should have done in the Socrates case.’
Legal Futures, 7th June 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The UK’s first ‘opt-out’ class action claim has been withdrawn on the basis that its costs would outweigh the potential damages available.’
OUT-LAW.com, 5th June 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The first attempt to bring an opt-out class action has failed after a decision of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) that meant the claim would not be worth enough money to proceed.’
Litigation Futures, 5th June 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The fall-out from the decision that the Law Society breached competition law looks set to last for several more months after the Competition Appeal Tribunal laid out the timetable for determining damages.’
Legal Futures, 5th June 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
Hyde v Milton Keynes NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 399
‘The claimant brought a personal injury claim against the defendant under a Community Legal Service funding certificate which was subject to costs limitations. Although the defendant had admitted liability, quantum remained in issue. With the funding certificate nearing exhaustion and the Legal Services Commission refusing further funding, the claimant’s solicitors concluded that the case could not be completed on a funded basis. Accordingly, the claimant entered into a conditional fee agreement (“CFA”) with her solicitors. The solicitors served on the defendant notice of a change in funding arrangements but took no steps to apply for or obtain a formal discharge of the funding certificate. The claim later settled, the defendant having made an increased offer which the claimant accepted. On the assessment of costs, the costs judge concluded that the claimant was entitled to recover from the defendant her costs arising under the CFA, rejecting the defendant’s contention that the CFA was unenforceable by virtue of sections 10(1) and 22(2) of the Access to Justice Act 1999 because it had been entered into at a time when the claimant was “funded” by the commission as part of the Community Legal Service. The judge dismissed the defendant’s appeal, holding that the claimant was not “funded” by the commission, for the purposes of sections 10(1) and 22(2), once the funding certificate had been exhausted, even though the certificate had not been discharged.’
WLR Daily, 23rd May 2017
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A city council has been ordered to pay £45,000 in fines and costs after an apprentice suffered serious hand injuries.’
Local Government Lawyer, 30th May 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The overwhelming majority of solicitors understand the need to offer their clients financial protection during the course of litigation, however, often the inclination is to assist in safeguarding their client’s financial risk is generally befitting when it comes to Issuing Proceedings. At this juncture it becomes appropriate to make a recommendation of the possibility in obtaining After the Event Insurance.’
Litigation Futures, 31st May 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025