‘The Court of Appeal has signalled the possibility of a non-party costs order in the Belsner case after ordering the claimant to make an interim costs payment of £130,000.’
Legal Futures, 16th November 2022
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The UK government is supporting a private member’s bill to bring back employers’ liability for harassment of employees by third parties at work, as well as introduce a new duty to prevent workplace sexual harassment.’
OUT-LAW.com, 3rd November 2022
Source: www.pinsentmasons.com
‘In this case HHJ Richard Williams (sitting as a High Court Judge) held that significant litigation misconduct by third parties (who had been controlling the litigation conduct of a named party to proceedings) was sufficient to make an order for non-party costs against them.’
Hailsham Chambers, 7th October 2022
Source: www.hailshamchambers.com
‘The High Court has declared unlawful the Department for Work & Pensions’ written guidance for officials on ‘third party deductions’.’
Local Government Lawyer, 29th September 2022
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A Norwich Pharmacal Order (NPO) is a disclosure order available in England and Wales which allows information to be obtained from third parties who have become ‘mixed up’ in wrongdoing, helping victims to investigate, pursue those ultimately responsible and recover their losses.’
OUT-LAW.com, 25th August 2022
Source: www.pinsentmasons.com
‘The Court of Appeal yesterday highlighted the importance of judicial control over costs to ensure that the involvement of third-party litigation funders does not create perverse incentives.’
Legal Futures, 29th July 2022
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘In principle, a claim can be made against one responsible party for all losses suffered, even when other parties were involved (e.g. a claim against solicitors when a barrister may have also provided advice) but what if a claim is made against you and you aren’t the only one to blame?’
Mills & Reeve, 26th July 2022
Source: www.mills-reeve.com
‘The Serious Fraud Office must prevent third parties having ‘direct access’ to the watchdog’s director and ensure all prosecutions have an “effective disclosure strategy”, a review into the calamitous Unaoil bribery case recommended today – as a third man jailed after the investigation had his name cleared.’
Law Society's Gazette, 21st July 2022
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Less than a fifth (18%) of the public are comfortable with the use of data from the courts by tech companies, a major study has found.’
Legal Futures, 21st July 2022
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A judge allowed an “impermissible device” designed to provide a public source of funding for the parties’ legal costs in private family law proceedings, the Family Court has ruled.’
Local Government Lawyer, 7th July 2022
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A High Court judge has criticised the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) for taking it upon itself to issue “sweeping anonymity orders” in respect of all the third parties in a case about a solicitor’s social media posts.’
Local Government Lawyer, 7th July 2022
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Since last year, Warren has proved a thorn in the side of those bringing claims arising out of external cyber-attacks – appearing, at least, to bar such Claimants from relying on the torts of negligence and misuse of private information (MPI), as well as breach of confidence. That appearance was confirmed to be reality by Saini J in Graeme Smith & ors v TalkTalk Telecom Group plc [2022] EWHC 1311 (QB). Avid readers of Panopticon will observe that it was Saini J who also decided Warren, thus confirming the position in Smith (not the South African cricketer), in the face of attempts by the Claimants initially to suggest that Warren was wrongly decided; diluted subsequently to seek to distinguish it on the facts. Saini J’s confirmation of the position post-Warren (and explaining that had given consideration to the case of Swinney v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police Force [1997] QB 464), is important, as it makes the law clear, following HHJ Pearce’s decision in Collins & Ors v Ticketmaster UK Limited [2022] Costs LR 123. In Collins, the Court had not decided the point, but did permit an amendment to plead MPI in a data breach case despite Warren – although “could not say that the claim went beyond that which was arguable”. HHJ Pearce permitted the amendment in Collins where the claimants had argued that Warren could be distinguished and did not apply to cases where the defendant had taken a deliberate decision to conduct its business in a manner that did not comply with the relevant industry standard – as opposed to “pure” omission cases. The clarity now provided by Saini J is welcome, given the importance of the feasibility of MPI claims in this field to claimants potentially being able to recover ATE premia (the conventional wisdom being that they are irrecoverable in DPA/GDPR claims).’
Panopticon, 30th May 2022
Source: panopticonblog.com
‘If a document is privileged, the basic position is it can be withheld from third parties.’
OUT-LAW.com, 13th May 2022
Source: www.pinsentmasons.com
‘The difficulty of people signing up to a collective action and the availability of third-party funding were legitimate factors to take into account in making it opt-out, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’
Legal Futures, 9th May 2022
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Clare Mendelle and James Hughes highlight the wide definition of Third-Party Income and the measures the courts are prepared to take to enforce the terms of longstanding contracts, by analysing the Buckinghamshire Council v FCC Buckinghamshire Limited case.’
Local Government Lawyer, 21st January 2022
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A heavyweight Court of Appeal, comprising the Master of the Rolls, the Vice President of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) and Nicola Davies LJ has handed down judgment in the conjoined appeals of Paul v Wolverhampton NHS Trust; Polmear v Royal Cornwall Hospital NHS Trust; Purchase v Ahmed [2022] EWCA Civ 12 (referred to, together, in this post as “Paul”). The appeal has been awaited and closely watched, dealing as it does with claims for psychiatric injury by secondary victims (that category of cases referred to, historically, as “nervous shock claims”) in a clinical negligence context. The Master of the Rolls gave the leading judgment, with which the Vice President and Nicola Davies LJ agreed.’
Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 18th January 2022
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘John Tughan QC of 4PB considers recent judgments that public law child lawyers need to know about.’
Family Law Week, 7th January 2022
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘The High Court has refused a litigation funder’s bid to use privileged material to overturn a divorce settlement which it says deliberately provides no assets for the wife to pay the £1m she owes it.’
Legal Futures, 4th January 2022
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The Family Court is seeing an increasing number of cases where property is (or is asserted to be) owned by a third party. As more parents assist children with purchasing a home or friends buy with friends, it is ever more likely that a financial provision case will involve consideration of who owns what. Here are some tips on how to approach such a case.’
Becket Chambers, 19th October 2021
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2023