This category can only be viewed by members.
Robert Salis and David Sawtell review estoppel and res judicata ‘What the courts are concerned with when considering cause of action estoppel and issue estoppel is a narrower decision based on a substantive rule of law.’ Issue estoppel, cause of action estoppel and res judicata are often discussed but rarely defined. To a defendant, they …
Continue reading "Practice: If at first you don’t succeed, don’t try again?"
This post is only available to members.
Anna Pertoldi and Maura McIntosh look at judicial views on compliance ‘A number of High Court decisions since 1 April have highlighted the increased focus on compliance. This article considers three of the recent judgments.’ The changes brought in on 1 April 2013 to implement the Jackson reforms included two that received comparatively little attention …
Continue reading "Procedure: Sticking to the rules – courts get tough on compliance post-Jackson"
This post is only available to members.
Simon Chandler and Sally Lord examine the emerging approach to relief from sanctions taken by the courts since the 1 April reforms ‘It is evident that the TCC continues to show itself a keen, even aggressive, proponent of the Jackson reforms and it is used to adopting a leadership role on rule changes and innovations.’ …
Continue reading "Reforms: Taking a break"
This post is only available to members.
Radd Seiger and Helen Morris discuss the lessons to be learned from Venulum Property Investments Ltd v Space Architecture Ltd ‘It is now abundantly clear that changes are afoot in the courts’ approach and application of the CPR.’ We represented the defendant in the Court of Appeal decision of Dixie v British Polythene Industries plc …
Continue reading "Sanctions: Method in our madness!"
This post is only available to members.
Judith Bloor and Christopher Malla assess the implications of Flatman v Germany; Weddall v Barchester Health Care Ltd ‘Recent changes in the costs regime, which came into force from 1 April 2013, include qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS) in personal injury cases.’In Flatman v Germany; Weddall v Barchester Health Care Ltd [2013], the Court of …
Continue reading "Costs: Turning the tables: costs orders against claimants’ solicitors"
This post is only available to members.
Guy Pendell and David Bridge report on a recent Supreme Court judgment dealing with anti-suit injunctions JSC appealed against the Court of Appeal’s decision that the court had jurisdiction to make a final anti-suit injunction in respect of proceedings brought by JSC, in breach of an arbitration clause.In a judgment delivered on Wednesday, the Supreme …
Continue reading "Arbitration: We’ve got the power"
This post is only available to members.
Alex Fox and Clare Arthurs consider the implications of the Prest decision ‘Lord Sumption criticised the ‘indiscriminate’ use of the expression ‘piercing the corporate veil’ to describe a number of different things. Correctly used, it means disregarding the separate personality of the company.’ The Supreme Court has recently handed down its much-anticipated judgment in the …
Continue reading "Company: De-Prest – corporate veil remains securely drawn"
This post is only available to members.
Thomas Crockett reviews developments in the treatment of litigants in person Courts ought to be mindful of making provision for litigants in person, whom are likely to face an inherent litigation disadvantage in the overwhelming majority of cases. In recent years the courts have seen a rise in the number of people litigating without professional …
Continue reading "Practice: Do it yourself – any further guidance since Tinkler v Elliot?"
This post is only available to members.
Paul Green examines recent case law on corporate liability ‘In the broadest sense, Chandler v Cape is a wake-up call that separate corporate entities are intended to be just that, rather than merely a vehicle by which risk can be compartmentalised.’For over 110 years, it has been an established legal principle that the acts and …
Continue reading "Company: Papering over the corporate cracks"
This post is only available to members.
Alistair Maughan and Sarah Wells look at whether a duty of good faith can ever be implied into a contract? ‘English courts have long held that parties should have the freedom to contract in the way that they wish, and so have been reluctant to intervene and impose overriding obligations of good faith. However, two …
Continue reading "Contract: Faith in the system"
This post is only available to members.
