All articles by Cait Sweeney – Page 2
-
AnalysisHallows v Wilson Barca LLP (2015)
This case is only available as a summary on Lawtel at present, but suggests that the duties imposed on public bodies by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 can be relevant to the common law doctrine of legal professional privilege
-
AnalysisKerins v Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust (unreported, 31 July 2015)
The court considered whether the conduct of the claimant’s solicitors had been unreasonable or improper within the meaning of CPR 44.11, conduct that included the intentional failure to disclose the existence of a CFA
-
AnalysisBritish Airways plc v Spencer (Trustees of the Airways Pensions Scheme) [2015] EWHC 2477
The High Court considers the meaning and purpose of CPR 35.1, and provides guidance on when expert evidence is ‘reasonably required’
-
FeatureChanges to CPR this 1 October - the facts
The 81st update to the Civil Procedure Rules comes into force on 1 October 2015. Cait Sweeney explains what’s changed
-
AnalysisCentral Bank of Ecuador v Conticorp SA [2015] UKPC 11
The Privy Council has reversed findings on dishonesty from the lower courts, and provides a useful reminder in relation to appealing findings of facts
-
AnalysisMichael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Sinclair [2015] EWCA Civ 774
Court of Appeal confirms that the principles set out in Mitchell have to be read in the light of Denton
-
AnalysisBegum v Hossain [2015] EWCA Civ 717
This case is an usual case of the court upholding a challenge to an expert determination, and a reminder of the limited grounds on which an expert determination can be challenged
-
AnalysisNokes v Heart of England Foundation NHS Trust [2015] EWHC B6 (Costs)
In one of the first judgments since the Jackson reforms, Master Leonard has given useful guidance on the extent of recoverability of post-LASPO ATE premiums in medical negligence claims
-
AnalysisP v P [2015] EWCA Civ 447
Court of Appeal upholds Mr Justice Mostyn’s decision to vary a trust in a nuptial settlement, in order to meet the wife’s financial claim. In his judgment, Lord Justice Jackson gave guidance about the procedure to appeal a High Court decision
-
Analysis
Cashman v Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 1312 (QB)
The High Court overrules a senior costs judge, after he denied a claimant who made a successful part 36 offer in detailed assessment proceedings the additional 10% uplift
-
NewsChanges to the practice direction on pre-action conduct
What you need to know about the changes, in force from 6 April
-
Analysis
CIP Properties Ltd (AIPT) v Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd [2015] EWHC 481 (TCC)
How to deal with costs management in circumstances where the claimant’s budget was “entirely unreliable” and where the costs were “wholly disproportionate”
-
Analysis
Home Group Ltd v Matrejek [2015] EWHC 441 (QB)
The High Court has allowed a case to continue despite a party failing to turn up for a directions hearing, and post-Denton, is another expression of leniency by the court in relation to parties seeking relief from sanctions
-
Analysis
Hamed v Mills & Tottenham Hotspur Football Club [2015] EWHC 298 (QB)
In this case, which provides a useful example of cost assessment in cases where there are two parties and part 36 offers, the court found negligence on the part of a doctor and football club in a claim brought by a professional football player
-
Analysis
Yeo v Times Newspapers Ltd [2015] EWHC 209 (QB)
The High Court has highlighted some common issues that arise in costs management, and given general guidance on completing costs budgets
-
Analysis
Kazakhstan Kagazy plc v Baglan Abdullayevich Zhunus [2015] EWHC 404 (Comm)
It may be reasonable for a party incurring costs to spare no expense in a case where large amounts of money are at stake, says Mr Justice Leggatt.
-
AnalysisSavoye and Savoye Ltd v Spicers Ltd [2015] EWHC 33 (TCC)
High Court has more than halved a successful party’s costs on summary assessment on the basis of proportionality, in one of the clearest applications of the new proportionality rule seen so far
-
Analysis
JE v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 192
Court of Appeal rules on limits of power under CPR 52.9A to limit costs of appeals in proceedings where recovery is normally restricted.
-
Analysis
Ultimate Products Ltd v Wooley [2014] EWHC 2706 (Ch)
Court applied three-stage test in Denton when considering an application for relief from sanctions, and held failure to serve notice of new CFA was not a serious breach.
-
Analysis
Wagenaar v Weekend Travel Ltd and Serradj [2014] EWCA Civ 1105
Court of Appeal’s first interpretation of QOCS provisions, including whether the QOCS regime was a valid one and if QOCS applies to Part 20 proceedings between a defendant and a third party.
- Previous Page
- Page1
- Page2
- Page3
- Next Page