‘This is the Court of Appeal judgment in the appellant’s challenge to the lawfulness, extent and effect of the stay of Part 55 possession proceedings until 25 June 2020 under Practice Direction 51Z.’
Nearly Legal, 11th May 2020
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has rejected a challenge to the emergency practice direction issued by the Master of the Rolls to stay all possession proceedings for three months in response to Covid-19.’
Litigation Futures, 11th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Thus far, the two major steps taken in housing law to address the
current coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis are:
– CPR PD 51Z
– Coronavirus Act 2020 s.3 and Sch.29’
4-5 Gray's Inn Square, 28th April 2020
Source: www.4-5.co.uk
‘Without, hopefully, being too flippant, the above are, essentially, the questions that the Court of Appeal will be considering tomorrow in relation to Practice Direction 51Z, in Arkin v Marshall.’
4-5 Gray's Inn Square, 29th April 2020
Source: www.4-5.co.uk
‘It is “fundamental” to the disclosure duties of solicitors that clients are not allowed to select relevant documents, the High Court has stressed.’
Litigation Futures, 6th May 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Court of Appeal is to rule on Thursday on the power of the Master of the Rolls (MR) to make an emergency practice direction in response to Covid-19.’
Litigation Futures, 29th April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A judgment published this week on BAILII, Re Z, also, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Z (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor) [2020] EWCOP 20, is notable on two counts. First, that the case is described by the judge, Knowles J, as being held in public, although it was in fact a remote online hearing. Second, that “Z”, the 22 year old woman at the centre of the case had asked to be able to join the hearing but this had not been arranged.’
Transparency Project, 25th April 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘On 6 April 2020 the Temporary Insolvency Practice Direction (“TIPD”) came into force. On 7 April 2020 the guidance note issued by Chief ICCJ Briggs confirmed that, for the purposes of TIPD, applications under section 17 Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 are deemed urgent.’
Radcliffe Chambers, 17th April 2020
Source: radcliffechambers.com
‘Practice Direction 51Z, which came into force on 27 March 2020, has imposed a general 90-day stay on new and current Part 55 possession proceedings with (as of 20 April 2020) limited exceptions in a new paragraph 2A.’
St Philips Chambers, 22nd April 2020
Source: st-philips.com
‘Since announcing the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (the “Scheme”) in mid-March, the Government has issued several iterations of Guidance which explain the Scheme – not all in the same way. On 15 April 2020, HMT issued the ‘Coronavirus Act 2020 Functions of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme) Direction’ (the “Direction”). It is the Direction which finally provides a basis in law for the Scheme and to which close attention should now be paid.’
11KBW, April 2020
Source: www.11kbw.com
‘The back drop to this case is that the new Practice Direction CPR 51Z effectively stays possession proceedings and enforcement issued pursuant to CPR 55 for 90 days from March 2020.’
St Ives Chambers, 16th April 2020
Source: www.stiveschambers.co.uk
‘Since announcing the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (the “Scheme”) in mid-March, the Government has issued several iterations of Guidance which explain the Scheme – not all in the same way. On 15 April 2020, HMT issued the ‘Coronavirus Act 2020 Functions of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme) Direction’ (the “Direction”).[1] It is the Direction which finally provides a basis in law for the Scheme and to which close attention should now be paid.’
11KBW, 20th April 2020
Source: www.11kbw.com
‘On 6th April 2020 the TIPD came into force. It implements a number of changes and supplements to the Practice Direction – Insolvency Proceedings July 2018. The purpose is to avoid, where possible, parties attending court in person and the likely disruption in proceedings as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.’
Park Square Barristers, 8th April 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘In a time when we are all being urged to stay in our homes it seems appropriate to consider the recent changes to Housing Law in light of the Coronavirus pandemic. This article will consider the Coronavirus Act 2020, Practice Direction 51Z and the Guidance document issued by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (‘Guidance’).’
Pump Court Chambers, 7th April 2020
Source: www.pumpcourtchambers.com
‘Practice Direction 51Z was hastily brought into force on Friday 27 March 2020, after the Prime Minister’s televised instructions to the nation on the evening of Monday 23 March 2020 that everyone should stay at home in order to beat coronavirus. Practice Direction 51Z imposed a three-month stay on all Part 55 possession proceedings, which ensures that those who were facing the possibility of eviction from their home have some protection during the crisis. However, since the Practice Direction came into force, property practitioners have been grappling with the possibly unintended consequences that come from its very wide scope. This has been brought into sharp focus by the recent case of University College London Hospitals Foundation Trust v MB [2020] EWHC 882 (QB), in which PD51Z prevented an NHS Trust from obtaining a possession order to facilitate the discharge of a patient from hospital, in circumstances where her bed was needed for critically ill-patients, she was medically fit for discharge, and indeed she would be at less risk of infection from COVID-19 if out of the hospital. As this article explains, the NHS Trust in the UCLH case was able to obtain the relief it needed by the alternative route of an injunction, but the case nevertheless highlights that PD51Z may need to be revisited.’
Falcon Chambers, 15th April 2020
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
‘Practice Direction 31A of the CPR 1998 contemplates specifically that disclosure of electronic documents may be carried out by using keyword or other automated searches.’
Ropewalk Chambers, 6th April 2020
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘The past year has seen repeated attempts by the courts to solve the conundrum of electronic working and how it interfaces with outof-court appointments of administrators. Six decisions, all conflicting in whole or in part, none likely to result in an appeal, did little to ease the uncertainty surrounding the validity of notices efiled outside court hours by CE-File. There was no substantive attempt at resolution on the part of the Companies Court or the Insolvency Rules Committee; the Chancellor issued guidance to the effect that notices filed out-of-hours would be referred to a designated High Court Judge.’
Radcliffe Chambers, 8th April 2020
Source: radcliffechambers.com
‘The Civil Procedure Rule Committee has issued a practice direction allowing parties to agree longer extensions of time to comply with procedural time limits due to the coronavirus.’
Litigation Futures, 2nd April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Some of the amendments are in force from 31st March 2020, others from 6th April 2020. Here is a selection of some of the key points.’
Broadway House Chambers, 27th March 2020
Source: broadwayhouse.co.uk
‘A new practice direction clarifying when civil courts may derogate from the principle of open justice to conduct hearings remotely in private has been published today.’
Litigation Futures, 25th March 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
© Inner Temple Library 2023