Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

PRACTICE: Shine a light?

07 February 2014  

Rustam Dubash and Clare Arthurs report on recent developments in relief from sanctions

Clarity in the law is always welcome. In Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2013], the Court of Appeal could not have been clearer: court orders and directions exist to be complied with, and you fail to comply with them at your peril. This new, more robust approach should mean that relief from sanctions will be significantly harder to come by. However, the court stopped short of saying that relief from sanctions should never be granted. While this flexibility is undoubtedly reassuring for both parties and practitioners, the spotlight must now be trained on the circumstances under which the courts may grant relief from sanctions.

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    Aldington & ors v ELS International Lawyers LLP [2013] EWHC B29 (QB)

    Durrant v Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary [2013] EWCA Civ 1624

    Forstater & anor v Python (Monty) Pictures Ltd & anor [2013] EWHC 3759 (Ch)

    Harrison & anor v Black Horse Ltd [2013] EWHC B28 (Costs)

    John Holt & Co (Liverpool) Ltd & anor v Caterpillar (Ni) Ltd [2013] EWHC 4197 (Comm)

    Karbhari & anor v Ahmed [2013] EWHC 4042 QB

    MA Lloyd & Sons Limited v PPC International Ltd [2014] EWHC 41

    Mitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1537

    SC DG Petrol Srl v Vitol Broking Ltd [2013] EWHC 3920 (Comm)

    Thevarajah v Riordan & ors [2014] EWCA Civ 15

    Webb Resolutions Ltd v E-Surv Ltd [2014] EWHC 49 (QB)