Costs, Confusion and Compromise – Keynote Address of Mr Justice Foskett

Posted December 4th, 2014 in arbitration, costs, fees, judges, limitations, news, speeches by sally

Costs, Confusion and Compromise (PDF)

Keynote Address of Mr Justice Foskett

Professional Negligence Lawyers’ Association Annual Conference, 4th December 2014


Relief From Sanctions – Part 2 – Applying in Time – Zenith PI Blog

Posted November 25th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, limitations, news, sanctions, time limits by sally

‘Mitchell [2014] 1 WLR 795 and Denton [2014] 1 WLR 3926 dealt with the situation of an application out of time, that is to say when the time had expired for performance of a step dictated by a rule or by practice direction or a court order had expired. But the further question arises, To what extent do the principles laid down there apply in the situation where one applies in time, that is to say before the expiry date? That is of great importance, because, if one is handling a case properly, it should become obvious, at least some days if not weeks in advance, that a particular time limit is not going to be able to be achieved. This may be for a variety of reasons, sometimes because of illness or – tell it not in Gath! – the delays of counsel. This matter was considered in depth fairly recently in Re Guidezone Ltd, Kaneria-v-Kaneria [2014] 1 WLR 3728, by Nugee J. In a full and careful judgment, the judge considered what was the position when an in-time application was made under CPR r.3.1(2)(a) for extension of time. He held that such an application was not an application for relief from sanctions, nor was it closely analogous to one. Therefore, Mitchell did not apply to it.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 25th November 2014


Frontier Estates -v- Berwin Leighton Paisner: in time application for extension of time refused – Zenith PI Blog

Posted November 21st, 2014 in civil procedure rules, limitations, news, time limits by tracey

‘Parties are advised to make applications in advance of the expiry of time limits in order to avoid a breach and have the courts look more favourably on their applications. It must be remembered however that an application made in time is not necessarily bound to succeed.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 21st November 2014


Bewry v Reed Elsevier UK Ltd (trading as LexisNexis) and another – WLR Daily

Posted November 18th, 2014 in appeals, defamation, law reports, limitations, time limits by sally

Bewry v Reed Elsevier UK Ltd (trading as LexisNexis) and another [2014] EWCA Civ 1411; [2014] WLR (D) 474

‘Where a court was determining whether to exercise its discretion under section 32A of the Limitation Act 1980 to disapply the one-year limitation period applying by virtue of section 4A of the 1980 Act to a claim for libel, the claimant’s ignorance of the limitation period would rarely if ever be a factor which carried any or any significant weight given the policy reasons underlying the one-year limitation period for libel claims.’

WLR Daily, 30th October 2014


Limitation: Constructive Knowledge re-visited. Howard Platt –v- BRB (Residuary) Limited [2014] EWCA Civ 1401 – Zenith PI Blog

Posted November 5th, 2014 in appeals, limitations, medical records, news, personal injuries by sally

‘On 15th October 2014, the Court of Appeal had cause to review the manner in which a claimant might find a claim statute barred by reason of constructive knowledge.’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 5th November 2014


Jackson calls for single limitation period – Litigation Futures

Posted November 4th, 2014 in contracts, judges, Law Commission, limitations, news, reports, speeches by sally

‘Lord Justice Jackson has called on the government to create a “single core limitation regime” for all claims in contract and tort, as recommended by the Law Commission.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 4th November 2014


“It’s too late baby, now it’s too late”: limitation, competition claims and knowledge – Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers

Posted October 31st, 2014 in competition, limitations, news, public interest by sally

‘How much knowledge does a potential claimant need before time begins to run against a competition claim against a party alleged to have breached competition law? This was the key question addressed by Mr Justice Simon in the first case in which an English Court has had to consider the effect of s.32 of the Limitation Act 1980 (“LA”) in the context of a competition claim.’

Full story

Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 31st October 2014


Service by the courts – Law Society’s Gazette

‘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


Second bite of the cherry? Bringing a second action against different employers for development of mesothelioma: abuse of process, cause of action estoppel and discretion under s33 Limitation Act 1980 considered – Zenith PI Blog

‘Would an action against employers who were unidentifiable at the time of an initial claim against 8 other employers in 2003 succeed where it was argued that such proceedings were an abuse of process of the court, that there was cause of action estoppel and where the claim was statute barred and required an application under s 33 Limitation Act 1980?’

Full story

Zenith PI Blog, 21st October 2014


Net contribution clauses: What you need to know – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted September 25th, 2014 in construction industry, contracts, damages, limitations, news by sally

‘Most construction professionals will be familiar with net contribution clauses (NCCs) in consultants’ appointments and collateral warranties but their use should not necessarily be limited to the construction sector. They may be useful in any project where professionals from a multiplicity of disciplines are retained.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 19th September 2014


The quasi-trust – The Barristers’ Hub

‘As every student of equity knows well, a trust is a type of property ownership in which one or more people (the trustee(s)) hold property on behalf of one or more other people (the beneficiary/ies), exercise all the powers of an owner of property in relation to third parties, but are bound to do so for the exclusive interests of the beneficiaries. A trust can be express, made by a formal written implement, or implied, either by transfer of property without explanation (a resulting trust) or in circumstances where the common intention of the parties is or is deemed to be for the property to be held on trust (a constructive trust). Both express and implied trusts are genuine trusts: the property is owned by the trustee, subject to the interest of the beneficiaries.’

Full story

The Barristers’ Hub, 1st August 2014


David T. Morrison & Co Limited t/a Gael Home Interiors (Respondent) v ICL Plastics Limited and others (Appellants) (Scotland) – Supreme Court

David T. Morrison & Co Limited t/a Gael Home Interiors (Respondent) v ICL Plastics Limited and others (Appellants) (Scotland) [2014] UKSC 48 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 30th July 2014


Ballinger and another v Mercer Ltd and another – WLR Daily

Ballinger and another v Mercer Ltd and another; [2014] EWCA Civ 996; [2014] WLR (D) 335

‘Where a claimant applied to introduce a new claim by amendment under CPR r 17.4, and the defendant could show a prima facie defence of limitation, the burden was on the claimant to show that the defence was not reasonably arguable. Amendments seeking to add or substitute a new cause of action would only be permitted if they arose out of the same or substantially the same facts as were already in issue on the existing claims.’

WLR Daily, 17th July 2014


Agbenowossi-Koffi v Donvand Ltd (t/a Gullivers Travel Associates) – WLR Daily

Agbenowossi-Koffi v Donvand Ltd (t/a Gullivers Travel Associates): [2014] EWCA Civ 855; [2014] WLR (D) 282

‘Where a claim of race discrimination had been dismissed on limitation grounds those allegations could not be repeated in a second claim together with additional allegations which could have been included in the first claim but had not been, in order to avoid the limitation defence by founding a claim based on conduct extending over a period of time. The second claim was an abuse of process.’

WLR Daily, 24th June 2014


Dawson v Thomson Airways Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted June 25th, 2014 in airlines, carriage by air, compensation, delay, EC law, law reports, limitations by sally

Dawson v Thomson Airways Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 845; [2014] WLR (D) 279

‘The limitation period applicable to a claim brought in England for compensation for cancellation or delay under articles 5 and 7 of Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 was the six-year period prescribed by section 9 of the Limitation Act 1980.’

WLR Daily, 19th June 2014


Court of Appeal rules against second airline on flight delays – Law society’s Gazette

Posted June 20th, 2014 in airlines, appeals, compensation, delay, limitations, news by tracey

‘The aviation industry has suffered another court defeat after an appeal judge ruled claims can be made up to six years after a flight delay.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 20th June 2014


Insolvent defendants and claimants – Thirty Nine Essex Street

‘Corporate bodies (limited companies or LLPs) have a separate legal identity that ceases to exist upon dissolution. Dissolution can occur, broadly speaking, in two ways, one is at the end of the process of winding up (whether voluntary or compulsory) and the other is by the process of striking off the Register of Companies or limited liability partnerships. The latter occurs either as a result of the company’s or LLP’s failure to file accounts, returns etc. or by a process of voluntary striking off.’

Full story (PDF)

Thirty Nine Essex Street, 7th March 2014


Amending a statement of case after limitation period has ended – Hardwicke Chambers

‘In Chandra & ors v Brooke North [2013] EWCA Civ 1559 the Court of Appeal gives practitioners and courts useful guidance about the correct approach to applications to amend introducing new claims outside limitation periods. The history of the case is a demonstration of the procedural knots and costly consequences for the parties that can be created when the lower courts go further than they should.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 13th March 2014


Kairos Shipping Ltd and another v Enka & Co LLC and others – WLR Daily

Kairos Shipping Ltd and another v Enka & Co LLC and others: [2014] EWCA Civ 217;   [2014] WLR (D)  113

‘It is in principle possible to constitute a limitation fund under the International Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims 1976, scheduled to the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, by means of a guarantee in the form of a letter of undertaking provided by a protection and indemnity club.’

WLR Daily, 6th March 2014


The Mis-Selling of Interest Rate Swaps – A Discussion – No. 5 Chambers

Posted February 24th, 2014 in banking, financial regulation, interest, limitations, news by sally

‘As many will be aware, the recent RBS swaps cases have thrown up interesting issues, including the proper characterization of legal duties owed by banks and other regulated firms, standard form limitation/exclusion terms, and Limitation Act problems. These issues are further complicated by the LIBOR manipulation points raised in Graisely Properties v Barclays.’

Full story

No. 5 Chambers, 24th February 2014