July/August 2012 #44 – Law Journals

Practice: Does duty call?

David Robinson contemplates a recent case on the extent of a solicitor’s duties The decision in Shepherd Construction Ltd v Pinsent Masons LLP provides welcome clarification on the extent to which solicitors are required to review and update previous advice.In a decision that will be welcomed by solicitors and professional indemnity insurers alike, the High …

Continue reading "Practice: Does duty call?"

This post is only available to members.

Fraud: Bad pennies

Alison Padfield considers the recovery of the costs of investigating insurance fraud: current routes and proposed reform The only remedy for breach of the duty of good faith is avoidance of the policy, not damages, so the costs of investigating a claim cannot be recovered by that route. According to the United Kingdom’s Insurance Fraud …

Continue reading "Fraud: Bad pennies"

This post is only available to members.

Commercial: To pierce or not to pierce? The Court of Appeal protects the corporate veil

Clare Arthurs assesses a recent challenge to corporate protection VTB’s original case was pleaded in deceit and unlawful means conspiracy. The judge overturned the permission VTB had obtained (ex parte) to serve proceedings out of the jurisdiction. The expression ‘Piercing the corporate veil’ is a neat turn of phrase, but what does it actually mean? …

Continue reading "Commercial: To pierce or not to pierce? The Court of Appeal protects the corporate veil"

This post is only available to members.

Funding: Back to the future: costs reform

John Leadley, Nicola Gare and Charlotte Nolan discuss costs and litigation funding It is largely accepted by industry, practitioners, the judiciary and government that the introduction of the access to justice reforms in 1999 tipped the balance too far in favour of claimants. The long-awaited costs reforms brought about as a result of Lord Justice …

Continue reading "Funding: Back to the future: costs reform"

This post is only available to members.

Costs: It’s not winning but taking part that counts

Mark Surguy looks at the costs consequences of not quite winning The trial judge decided that that the notion of ‘success’ depended on who was paying money to whom at the end of the case. He did not think that the claimant had exaggerated his case and felt he had reasonably relied on expert evidence. …

Continue reading "Costs: It’s not winning but taking part that counts"

This post is only available to members.

Fee Agreements: Cheap at half the price

Julian Chamberlayne and Kerie Receveur review recent case law on retrospective and discounted conditional fee agreements Following Birmingham City Council v Forde [2009] and Gloucestershire County Council v Evans [2008], which respectively held that retrospective CFAs and discounted CFAs were not contrary to public policy, we have waited many years for decisions applying the principles. …

Continue reading "Fee Agreements: Cheap at half the price"

This post is only available to members.

Procedure: Lucky strike

David Sawtell reports on the impact of Fairclough Homes on applications to strike out It would only be in a very rare case where, at the end of a trial, it would be appropriate to strike out a case rather than dismiss it on the merits. The purpose of striking out a claim was to …

Continue reading "Procedure: Lucky strike"

This post is only available to members.