Cait Sweeney
Cait was a legal researcher working in the areas of civil procedure and personal injury before being called to the Bar in 2012. She is a pupil at St Philips Chambers.
Feature95th and 96th CPR updates: what's new?
The 95th and 96th updates to the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) recently came into force. Cait Sweeney looks at the headline changes.
FeatureThe 92nd CPR update: what's new?
The 92nd update to the Civil Procedure Rules came into force on 1 October 2017. The update makes several changes to the court’s case management powers and detailed assessment proceedings.
AnalysisCase note: Shackleton and Associates v Al Shamsi [2017] EWHC 304 (Comm)
In this case, Mr Justice Teare considered whether the claimant company providing legal services could recover costs for the time spent on the litigation by its sole shareholder, a solicitor advocate.
FeatureCPR 88th update: what's new?
The 88th update to the Civil Procedure Rules (SI 2017/95) makes several important changes which will all come into force by 6 April. Cait Sweeney looks at the pivotal developments.
Analysis86th update to the CPR now in force - what's new?
The 86th update to the Civil Procedure Rules has been published, coming into effect on 3 October 2016. Cait Sweeney guides you through the key change you need to know about - the replacement of existing CPR 52 (appeals) with a new part 52.
AnalysisHayward v Zurich Insurance Company plc [2016] UKSC 48
Supreme Court holds that a settlement may be set aside for fraud even if fraud is suspected
AnalysisVilca v Xstrata [2016] EWHC 1824 (QB)
The High Court has held that it has the power to order a party to appoint a separate law firm to conduct an independent re-review of its disclosure on strong grounds, although it chose not to in this case
AnalysisWebb Resolutions Ltd v Countrywide Surveyors Ltd [2016] Ch Div (4 May 2016)
The court has held a claimant liable for a defendant’s costs of and incidental to an abandoned professional negligence claim, even though the claim form had not been served - good news for defendants aiming to recover costs incurred pre-action?
AnalysisMassar [2016] ECJ C-460/14; Buyuktipi [2016] ECJ C-5/15
The ECJ has provided guidance on the proper construction of ‘inquiry’ in article 4(1) of Council Directive 87/344/EEC relating to insureds’ right to choose a lawyer under a legal expenses insurance policy
AnalysisMendes v Hochtief (UK) Construction Ltd [2016] EWHC 976 (QB)
Mr Justice Coulson has ruled that a claimant could recover trial advocacy fees under CPR 45 when a claim settled on the day of the hearing, before the trial was heard
AnalysisBolt Burdon Solicitors v Tariq & Ors [2016] EWHC 811 (QB)
The court upholds a contingency fee agreement whereby the solicitors billed £498,083.52, whereas on a time basis the total would have been around £50,000.00 - an 800 per cent uplift
News83rd update to the CPR now in force - what's new?
The 83rd update to the Civil Procedure Rules has been published, with the majority of the amendments coming into effect on 1 and 6 April 2016. Cait Sweeney guides you through the key changes you need to know about
AnalysisFamily Mosaic Home Ownership Ltd v Peer Real Estate Ltd [2016] EWHC 257 (Ch)
The High Court has given guidance on the transfer of existing cases to the Shorter Trials Scheme
AnalysisGreat news for claimants? Fixed costs trumped by part 36 offer
Lord Dyson has ruled that assessed costs should trump fixed costs where claimants secure more than they had offered to settle for, and said that parliament had not intended to create a scheme to penalise claimants when it had established a fixed costs regime
AnalysisSuh v Mace (UK) Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 4
Court of Appeal rules that litigants in persons can benefit from ‘without prejudice’ rule without knowing what it means
AnalysisSugar Hut Group Ltd v AJ Insurance Service [2016] EWCA Civ 46
What are the costs consequences following the making of part 36 offers? The Court of Appeal overturns a decision on costs and confirms there is no ’near miss’ rule for part 36 offers
AnalysisR v Secretary of State for Justice [2016] UKSC 2
The Supreme Court has granted anonymity to a double-murderer. When is it right to keep the names of parties to civil litigation a secret?
AnalysisHarlequin Property (SVG) Ltd v Wilkins Kennedy [2015] EWHC 3050 (TCC)
A very wide approach to the inspection of confidential material? The court has ruled that the disclosure of confidential Serious Fraud Office and client documents to dispose fairly of the issues overweighed any public interest in keeping them witheld
AnalysisThevarajah v Riordan [2015] UKSC 78
An important decision from the Supreme Court that has reaffirmed that a party who has failed to obtain relief from sanctions cannot make another application without demonstrating a change in circumstances
AnalysisSupreme Court dismisses ParkingEye appeal: our analysis
In the first review of the law of penalties in a century, the Supreme Court has found in favour of ParkingEye 6-1. Cait Sweeney considers the implications of this hugely significant judgment