Continue reading "Conduct of proceedings: What a difference a day makes"
This post is only available to members.
Conduct of proceedings: What a difference a day makes
Clare Dixon QC and Nicholas Broomfield consider the Supreme Court’s decision in Matthew v Sedman and whether it represents a departure from the established rule of limitation ‘Midnight deadline’ cases such as Gelmini and Matthew are distinct from cases where the cause of action accrues part way through a day and different principles apply. For …
Cases Referenced
Cases in bold have further reading - click to view related articles.
- Dodds v Walker [1981] 1 WLR 1027
- Gelmini v Moriggia [1913] 2 KB 549
- Lester v Garland (1808) 15 Ves Jun 248
- Marren v Dawson Bentley & Co Ltd [1961] 2 QB 135
- Matthew & ors v Sedman & ors [2019] EWCA Civ 475
- Matthew & ors v Sedman & ors [2021] UKSC 19; WTLR(w) 2022-07
- Mercer v Ogilvy (1796) 3 Pat App 434
- Pritam Kaur v S Russell & Sons Ltd [1973] QB 336
- Pugh et, Uxor v Duke of Leeds (1777) 2 Cowp 714
- Radcliffe v Bartholomew [1892] 1 QB 161
- Stewart v Chapman [1951] 2 KB 792
- The Goldsmiths’ Co v The West Metropolitan Railway Co [1904] 1 KB 1
- Trow v Ind Coope (West Midlands) Ltd [1967] 2 QB 899