‘Twin doses of dishonesty in the Supreme Court, last month. Both raised dilemmas for the SC trying to steer a principled way (in different circumstances) towards determining the cost of lying.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 6th August 2016
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘“Fundamental dishonesty” and other measures, outlined by Denise Brosnan.’
New Law Journal, 26th July 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘David Wright discusses fixed advocacy fees.’
New Law Journal, 26th July 2016
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘Sarah Fraser Butlin considers the most recent EAT judgment on the issue in Olayemi v Athena Medical Centre.’
Cloisters, 25th July 2016
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘William Latimer-Sayer QC considers the case of XP V Compensa Towarzystwo SA v Przeyslaw Bejger [2016] EWHC 1728 (QB) in which Whipple J had to grapple with a number of tricky quantum issues.’
Cloisters, 25th July 2016
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘William Griffiths QC is a successful silk but was the unsuccessful defendant in the widely reported case of Hardy v Griffiths [2014]. Mr and Mrs Griffiths had exchanged contracts with the claimant, Mr Hardy, to buy Laughton Manor for £3.6m and paid £150,000 on account of the 10% deposit, the contract incorporating the Standard Conditions of Sale (SCS).’
Hardwicke Chambers, 25th July 2016
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘The fact that a clinical negligence case had become a quantum-only dispute did not take it out of the costs management regime, meaning that the claimant’s failure to serve a costs budget restricted its recoverable costs to the court fees only, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 25th July 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Sir Cliff Richard is set for a court battle with the BBC, after the corporation rejected a demand that it pay damages for its controversial live coverage of a police raid on the singer’s home.’
Daily Telegraph, 24th July 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The High Court has ruled that a claimant’s part 36 offer was a counter-offer, meaning that an earlier common law offer by the defendants no longer remained open for acceptance.’
Litigation futures, 15th July 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Eleven activists who took part in G20 protests seven years ago have received more than £60,000 in damages from the City of London police for false imprisonment, assault and breaches of the Human Rights Act. The case has raised serious questions about who owns personal data collected by police.’
The Guardian, 16th July 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Surrey and others v Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 1598 (QB)
‘Three separate cases involving clinical negligence litigation against the defendant hospital had been proceeding for several years prior to 1 April 2013. Under new legislation coming into force on 1 April 2013, a claimant entering into a conditional fee agreement (“CFA”) from that date would be unable to recover success fees and after the event (“ATE”) insurance premiums from the defendant if successful in the litigation. In each case the claim had initially been advanced with the benefit of legal aid, but in the month prior to 1 April 2013 the claimant’s solicitors, with the agreement of the claimant’s litigation friend, arranged for the legal aid certificate to be discharged and for the claim henceforth to be funded by a CFA to preserve the ability to recover the success fee and ATE premiums. In none of the cases was the litigation friend informed that the consequence would be the loss of the recognised 10% uplift on general damages. In each case the defendant challenged the successful claimant’s bill of costs, in so far as it sought to recover the success fee and the ATE premium, contending that the litigation friend’s decision was based on materially unreasonable advice (by reason of the omission to mention the 10% uplift) and that, since the burden was on the receiving party to establish that a cost was reasonably incurred and it was unknown what decision would have been made had proper advice been given, the doubt as to whether the additional costs were reasonably and proportionately incurred should be resolved in favour of the paying party. The costs judge in each case upheld the defendant’s challenge to those items, holding that the changed funding arrangements were not reasonable. Each claimant appealed, contending that the reasonableness of the decision to change funding had to be objectively assessed, so that the quality of any antecedent advice given to the claimants’ litigation friends was irrelevant.’
WLR Daily, 1st July 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has upheld an injunction over what was a relatively minor breach of a right to light, primarily because of the developer’s poor conduct throughout the dispute.’
OUT-LAW.com, 12th July 2016
Source: www.out-law.com
‘GCN’s Jonathan Holt sets out below the background and detail to the recent emergence of a potential argument employable by those facing a warrant for possession, whether it be as the result of rent arrears or a failure to make mortgage payments.’
Nearly Legal, 13th July 2016
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘Andy Creer considers the recent decision of Laditi and another v Marlbray Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 476 in which Brie Stevens-Hoare QC and Lina Mattsson acted for the Claimants/Respondents.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 13th June 2016
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘MasterCard is facing a claim of up to £19 billion in damages in a UK collective action over card charges that were passed on to shoppers.’
The Independent, 6th July 2016
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘A claimant who only beat his part 36 offer at trial because of the interest on the damages awarded through to judgment is not entitled to enhanced costs, the High Court has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 4th July 2016
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The first opt-out collective action seeking damages for breaches of competition law has been lodged with the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), following changes to the law in October 2015.’
OUT-LAW.com, 27th June 2016
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has refused an application by six English mattress makers to use its new fast-track procedure (FTP) to claim damages for anti-competitive behaviour, given the complexity of the underlying issues.’
OUT-LAW.com, 20th June 2016
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The former MP George Galloway has issued a court apology and agreed to pay damages to his former assistant Aisha Ali-Khan over claims that she helped her former police officer husband run a dirty tricks operation against him and his Respect party.’
The Guardian, 20th June 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025