Monthly Archives: April 2014

THE CRITERIA TO BE APPLIED WHEN A PARTY MAKES AN APPLICATION AHEAD OF THE DATE OF THE BREACH: THE ROBERT CRITERIA CONSIDERED

In In Kaneria -v- Kaneria [2014] EWHC 1165 (Ch) it was made clear that Mitchell principles did not apply in cases where an application was made prior to the date of breach.   The principles in    Robert -v- Momentum Services [2003] EWCA Civ 229 The Kaneria case has been considered in detail.  Given the significance of the case […]

HAS PROPER DISCLOSURE BEEN GIVEN? A NEW AREA OF BATTLE. GLOBAL MARINE DRILLSHIPS LIMITED –V- WILLIAM LA BELLA [2014] EWHC 1230 (Ch) CONSIDERED

In the post Mitchell world parties are anxious to demonstrate that their opponents have not complied with orders of the court and, consequently, should have their actions struck out.  These arguments are likely to be particularly problematic in issues relating to whether adequate disclosure has been given.  The question of whether disclosure is full and […]

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: WHAT DOES “TRIVIAL” ACTUALLY MEAN? A LOOK AT THE CASES

 If you attend one of the, numerous, “Jackson” and “Mitchell” conferences that abound at the moment you can easily make the lecturer sweat. Ask them to define “trivial”.  Whether a breach is “trivial” or not is crucial to the way that the court approaches the issue of relief from sanctions.  Here we look at the […]

A BUDGET SERVED A DAY LATE IS A “TRIVIAL” ERROR: WAIN –v- GLOUCESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL [2014] EWHC 1274 (TCC) CONSIDERED

It was made clear in Mitchell that the courts should not concern themselves with “trivial” breaches, however what was meant by “trivial” was never defined.  In Wain –v- Gloucestershire County Council Judge Grant, sitting as a judge of the High Court, held that a costs budget served a day late was “trivial” and an application […]

WHAT IS THE DATE OF SERVICE? THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE “DEEMED” DATE OF SERVICE AND THE “EFFECTED” DATE OF SERVICE

T & L SUGARS LTD V TATE & LYLE INDUSTRIES LTD [2014] EWHC 1066 Problems with service and the date of service continue to abound. They have always been subject to a much stricter regime.  In particular the date of service of proceedings can be crucial.In T & L Sugars –v- Tate & Lyle the […]

IMPORTANT CHANGES ON THE 22ND APRIL: NEW COURT FEES AND NEW STATEMENT OF TRUTH ON COST BUDGET

The previous post dealt with the date of applications and considered the potential implications if an application was not accompanied by the relevant fee. It seems timely to remind everyone that: 1. New Court Fees come into force on the 22nd April.  Details of the fees can be found here an explanatory leaflet sets out the fees […]

WHEN IS AN APPLICATION “MADE”? A MATTER THAT COULD BE OF SOME IMPORTANCE

The case of In Kaneria -v- Kaneria [2014] EWHC 1165 (Ch) discussed in a previous post means that there is a highly significant difference between applications made before the date of compliance and those made afterwards.   An application made after the date of compliance is subject to all the rigours of the Mitchell test.  An application […]