‘A circuit judge has ruled that a failure in a portal case to include the same damages figure in the stage 3 court proceedings pack (CPP) as in the stage 2 settlement pack form renders the offer void.’
Litigation Futures, 19th August 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘In a decision described as a “victory for open justice”, the Supreme Court has held that non-parties to litigation are entitled to access certain documents from a trial to which it was not a party.’
UKSC Blog, 5th August 2019
Source: ukscblog.com
‘A High Court judge has stressed that witness statements from litigants’ solicitors will be disregarded if they appear to be irrelevant or badly sourced.’
Law Society's Gazette, 7th August 2019
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The High Court is set to rule on whether a party’s right to appeal from an oral hearing that follows a provisional assessment is limited to decisions made at the hearing.’
Litigation Futures, 6th August 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Campaigners, the media and others who are not parties to court proceedings should be permitted to access court documents as “the default position”, the UK’s highest court has ruled.’
OUT-LAW.com, 1st August 2019
Source: www.pinsentmasons.com
‘A critical part of any unfair prejudice petition is the valuation of the minority shareholding. Paul Mitchell QC and Nigel Burroughs of 4 New Square were counsel on different sides in Swain v Swains Plc, a case in which the expert share valuation evidence was taken concurrently. They look at the pros and cons of hot tubbing, and offer practical advice on how to approach the way experts should give their evidence.’
4 New Square, 22nd July 2019
Source: www.4newsquare.com
‘Nisha Bambhra, barrister at Garden Court Chambers, considers the implications for expert witnesses who fail to comply with court orders.’
Family Law Week, 11th July 2019
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘The new whiplash portal is due to launch in the spring of 2020. It is likely to cover injuries arising from accidents occurring after 6th April.’
Zenith PI Blog, 9th July 2019
Source: zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘People have entered onto your client’s land – or are threatening to do so. Your client wants them to leave – or not to arrive. Your advice is sought. In practice, self-help is out of the question. Section 6 of the Criminal Law Act 1977 prohibits the use or threat of violence against person or property for the purpose of securing entry to any premises without lawful excuse. A right to possession or occupation of the premises is no excuse, unless your client is a “displaced residential occupier” or “protected intending occupier”. But in any event, you cannot encourage the use of self-help, because of the risk of disorder that it may entail. A legal remedy is required.’
Falcon Chambers, June 2019
Source: www.falcon-chambers.com
‘The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Woodward v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 985 provides an important clarification as to whether lawyers have a duty to inform the opposing party of their mistakes when conducting litigation.’
No. 5 Chambers, 20th June 2019
Source: www.no5.com
‘The CPR contain a number of provisions concerning when a document is deemed to have been served. One of these, introduced by amendment in 2011, is CPR 6.14.’
Littleton Chambers, 25th June 2019
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘When seeking any order it always helps to make the right application, to the right court, following the right procedure. Although when it does go horribly wrong it at least provides valuable learning for the rest of us.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 1st July 2019
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The court can decide it is unjust to award some, but not all, of the consequences of beating a part 36 offer, a High Court judge has ruled.’
Legal Futures, 25th June 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The High Court has ordered a party that missed the deadline to fix the date of a case management conference (CMC) by more than four years to pay security for costs as a sanction.’
Litigation Futures, 21st June 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Woodward & Ors v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 985 is the latest procedural skirmish in the ongoing battle between Claimants and Defendants. Following on from the Supreme Court’s judgment in Barton v Wright Hassall LLP [2018] UKSC 12, it is an important reminder – if any were needed – that Claimants must be familiar with the rules on service of claim forms, and with the other side’s procedural stance.’
Zenith PI, 17th June 2019
Source: zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘The government has no intention of making court processes exclusively online and so there is no need to give way to demands to guarantee this in primary legislation, peers were told this week.’
Legal Futures, 12th June 2019
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court is not keen to entertain appeals on procedural points, its annual report has indicated. It handled 23 permissions to appeal (PTA) applications in relation to procedure in the year to 31 March 2019 – far more than any other category of law – and only granted permission in one of them.’
Litigation Futures, 11th June 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A battle between a widow and stepson over a large estate “cries, indeed screams out” for the kind of “robust, judge-led” processes used to settle family law disputes, a High Court judge has said.’
Litigation Futures, 31st May 2019
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025