Amending Particulars of Claim: The claimant was permitted to amend its particulars of claim where the company's claim for recovery of money had and received, as formulated in the proposed amended particulars of claim, was sufficiently clear to enable the defendants to understand the nature of the case and plead to it.
|
Mental Health Act 1983, s.139(2) – Requirement to obtain leave to commence proceedings: Failure to obtain the leave of the High Court under s. 139(2) of the Mental Health Act 1983 before commencing civil proceedings was held to have rendered those proceedings a nullity.
|
Admission of late evidence: Where the appellants had sought to adduce late evidence in the form of a witness statement in support of their defence to the claim, the court held that the evidence could be adduced, as it had not raised any new issues and the trial judge was entitled to have all the evidence available on the issue in dispute.
|
This petition has been raised by Narden Services Limited for rectification of the register of members of Inverness Retail and Business Park Limited. The case considers confidentiality based on legal professional privilege which is a fundamental human right and the subordinate rules of court.
|
Application for Summary judgment / Strike out: The court dismissed the claimant's application for summary judgment or to strike out the defence because if the defendant's allegations were established at trial they would in fact provide a defence.
|
Admissibility of Similar Fact Evidence: It was incorrect that similar fact evidence was only admissible in a civil case if it was likely to be reasonably conclusive of a primary issue in the proceedings or, alternatively, if it had enhanced relevance so as to have substantial probative value. The correct test was whether the evidence was potentially probative in the proceedings.
|
Application for Committal for Contempt of Court: The claimant’s application seeking committal of the first defendant for contempt of court for non-compliance with an order requiring delivery up of documents was unsuccessful in light of unchallenged evidence that the defendant had been ill and had inadequate resources to satisfy the order in time. The court held that the actions of a defendant subsequent to service of a notice of an application to commit could not be considered as part of the cha ...
|
Limitation Act 1980, s.11 & Exercise of Discretion: The judge had not erred in the exercise of his discretion in disapplying s.11 of the Limitation Act 1980 and allowing a time-barred personal injury claim against a local authority employer to proceed. He had correctly directed himself and emphasised the need to have regard to all the circumstances. It was held that there was no prejudice caused by the delay, either by virtue of the fact a potential witness had died or that the determination of ...
|
Civil Procedure & Human Right Act 1998, s.6: The court held that the claimants' claims against the defendant department in respect of prior court decisions disclosed no reasonable grounds. In principle, there were other remedies available in respect of all the matters complained of. The claimants had access to justice by means of appeal procedures and, if those appeals failed, there was nothing in the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 that required or permitted a collateral attack on thos ...
|
Case Management – Discontinuation of claims: The court made orders in relation to the case management of litigation relating to the MMR/MR vaccine and, in particular, as to the discontinuation of claims by certain claimants, also approving the terms of settlement offered to certain claimants.
|
| 1 2 3 |