Blog
Why client favourability matters
Leor Franks
4 July 2014
Norwich Pharmacal order: providing assistance and information to another party – costs denied
Under the Norwich Pharmacal procedure the court can order that an individual or entity (the third party), who is not a party to court proceedings but who must be, innocently or not, mixed up in the wrongdoing, must assist a party to those proceedings (the applicant) by providing information or documents in respect of the (intended) proceedings. The information/documents might be required to enable the applicant to identify the wrongdoer, to pursue its claim and plead its case fully, to identify the full nature of the wrongdoing and/or to trace assets. In these circumstances the usual costs rule followed by the court is that the party seeking the information bears the costs and expenses incurred by the third party in complying with the order and in providing that information.
1 July 2014
Legal update: High Court confirms that no specific form is needed to withdraw a Part 36 offer to settle
In the case of Supergroup plc v Justenough Software Corp Inc. (2014) the High Court confirmed that no specific form of written notice was required to withdraw an offer to settle made under Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules (often referred to as a ‘Part 36 offer’). An offeror just had to serve something in writing which stated in terms that the offer was withdrawn.
27 June 2014
Legal Update: The Court of Appeal limits the presumption of undue influence
If, in a contract, undue influence is proved, the contract is voidable by the innocent party. There are two potential pathways to a decision: actual undue influence or presumed undue influence.
25 June 2014
Legal Update: The Supreme Court rules on religious doctrine in trust dispute
In the case of Shergill & Ors v Khaira & Ors [2014] UKSC 33, The Supreme Court discussed the approach to be taken to cases raising non-justiciable issues, and the approach to cases raising questions of religious doctrine.
9 June 2014
Case update: Relief from sanction granted for failure to file cost budget on time
In the case of Bari and others v Alternative Finance Ltd and another (2014), the High Court has granted relief from sanction for late filing of a costs budget, but ordered the claimant to pay indemnity costs for its failure.