All Dispute Resolution articles – Page 20
-
Analysis
Porter Capital Corporation v Zulfikar Masters (unreported, 19 March 2014)
This case illustrates more robust and stricter approach the courts are now taking, following the Jackson reforms, and how not complying with court rules can lead to heavy costs sanctions.
-
Feature
A delicate condition
Deborah Blythe and Sarah Towler’s top tips for providing excellent client service
-
FAQ
FAQ: Bullock and Sanderson orders
The Law Society’s Library discusses Bullock and Sanderson orders and lists where precedents can be found.
-
Feature
We can work it out
The defendant in the recent PGF II judgment was sanctioned for refusing to consider ADR. Sana Bibi explains why following the Jackson reforms, parties should ignore mediation at their peril
-
Feature
The Mitchell criteria and the new CPR 3.9
The amended CPR 3.9 just isn’t working, says Gordon Exall
-
-
Feature
Is ‘no win, no fee’ misleading?
On the heels of Legal Ombudsman criticism of conditional fee agreements, David Marshall wonders whether the end is near for such offers
-
Feature
Where are we now?
Dominic Regan gives us his predictions on what the rest of 2014 has in store for civil litigation
-
Analysis
Thevarajah v Riordan [2014] EWCA Civ 15
Court of Appeal overturned the Chancery Division’s (ChD) decision to grant relief from sanctions, finding that the ChD could not make an inconsistent order granting relief unless and until the original order had been set aside by way of a variation or revocation.
-
Analysis
Murills v Berlanda and Belvedere Medical Group Ltd (in liquidation) [2014] EWCA Civ 6
This case was struck out by the Court of Appeal because the claimant’s solicitors had not followed the right procedure for service of court proceedings and not given an address for service of the claim form.
-
Analysis
Rehill v Rider Holdings [2014] EWCA Civ 42
Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the defendant on withdrawn part 36 offer to settle a personal injury claim made when the claimant knew his prognosis was clear, and orders the dishonest claimant to pay litigation costs.
-
Analysis
Starbev GP Ltd v Interbrew Central European Holding BV [2013] EWHC 4038 (Comm)
A reminder of the test the court must apply when considering whether a document is subject to litigation privilege.
-
Analysis
MA Lloyd & Sons Ltd v PPC International Ltd [2014] EWHC 41 (QB)
The claimant was debarred from producing evidence about an issue at trial because it failed to comply with an order for exchange of witness statements.
-
Analysis
Webb Resolutions Ltd v E-Surv Ltd [2014] EWHC 49 (QB)
This case illustrates more robust and stricter approach the courts are now taking, following the Jackson reforms, and how not complying with court rules can lead to heavy costs sanctions.
-
Analysis
Spotlight: Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1526
Court of Appeal provided guidance, in light of the Jackson Reforms, on the circumstances in which relief from sanctions relating to non-compliance with rules, practice directions or court orders will be granted.
-
Feature
Can I get a witness?
Amanda Stevens’ top tips on being an effective expert witness in a post-Jackson litigation landscape
-
Feature
Social climbers
Being Tweetwise: one manager explains how to get the most out of Twitter for your firm
-
Feature
Hot tubbing – a clean start?
Could the hot tubbing phenomenon extend to other parts of the process, wonders John Seed