A single judge sitting in the High Court did have jurisdiction to make a committal order for an alleged contempt of court in proceedings commenced in the county court but subsequently transferred to the High Court.The appellant, who had been the original Claimant appealed against a decision that a single judge sitting in the High Court had jurisdiction to hear an application by the respondent Insurer for his committal for alleged contempt of court. The Insurer had filed and served a Defence alle ...
|
The trial judge had not erred in implicitly accepting a witness' evidence as truthful despite not clearly expressing his reasoning and consequent findings.A local authority appealed against a decision that it had breached its duty of care owed to the Claimant when she had fallen crossing a grass verge outside her house due an averred hole in the car. During the trial the judge considered a number of photographs of the verge taken at least 3 years after the accident which the Claimant suggested w ...
|
A judge's award of costs based on a Claimant's Part 36 offer was illegitimate as the offer had been withdrawn the Court could rely on the consequences of a previous unwithdrawn Part 36 offer.It was agreed between the parties that the judge's award of costs based on the second Part 36 offer was technically illegitimate as that offer had been withdrawn. The question was whether the award could or properly should be translated into Part 36 costs consequences under the surviving first offer or under ...
|
Low value RTA claim settled under the terms of a Part 36 offer, the costs were to be assessed under CPR 45 Part II rather than on the standard basis.The appellants, who had been claimants in low-value road traffic accident claims, appealed against decisions to award costs in accordance with Part 45 Part II rather than on the standard basis. In both cases, the Claimants had accepted Part 36 offers of sums totalling less than £10,000 made by the Defendants before the claims had been issued. The Co ...
|
This case concerned whether a sub-contract allowed the main contractor (Mulalley) to claim from the sub-contractor (Leander) if the sub-contractor's actions interfered with the progress of the main contract works. Mulalley issued withholding notices for delays by Leander, which Leander challenged in these proceedings. Leander argued that the sub-contract did not contain an express obligation to proceed diligently, and there was no implied term to this effect. Mulalley argued there was such an im ...
|
The Court of Appeal considered conjoined appeals and a cross-appeal arising out of two decisions of the TCC which (i) affirmed the jurisdiction of an adjudicator in spite of the fact that the adjudicator was the second appointed adjudicator, but then (ii) held that the second adjudicator's decision was a nullity for apparent bias. In respect of the jurisdiction of the second adjudicator, Jackson LJ, giving the judgment of the Court of Appeal, found that a party who did not pursue an adjudication ...
|
We are pleased to welcome Anis Waiz, Partner at Mohindra Maini LLP as he continues his critical review of current case law. In this post, Anis considers AIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler & Co (A Firm) [2012] EWHC 35 (Ch) (23 January 2012):- Introduction This is an important case for all solicitors acting for lenders taking security. It also provides a salutary lesson when dealing with redemptions and has a useful summary of the law relating to breach of trust claims and the appr ...
|
Hospital Trust Granted Summary Judgment In Clinical Negligence Claim Where Claimant Debarred From Relying On New Expert Evidence:-Judge Stockdale QC (sitting as a deputy High Court judge) granted the Defendant hospital trust summary judgment in respect of all outstanding issues in the underlying clinical negligence claim brought against it. Judgment by consent had been entered in respect of part of the claim, there having been an admission of a breach of duty in a limited sense. Summary judgment ...
|
We are pleased to welcome Anis Waiz, Partner at Mohindra Maini LLP as he writes a comprehensive case note on the recent Padden v Bevan Ashford Solicitors decision. Introduction First let me wish you all a very happy and peaceful new year. Continuing with my blogs on current case law this case from December is an important and a stark warning for lawyers who witness documents without considering fully their potential liability. The Court of Appeal noted in this cas ...
|
In another case in which the courts have overturned policy that is designed to control immigration without adequate regard to rights arising under the ECHR, the Supreme Court has decided that Article 8 of the ECHR prevents a complete ban on the entry for settlement of foreign spouses or civil partners unless both parties were aged 21 or over. This was contained in the Immigration Rules, para 277, and was meant to deter forced marriages. However, it might achieve also the prevention of many non-f ...
|
| 1 |