Tag Archives: Case Management

ADJOURNMENTS, ILL HEALTH, FAIRNESS AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS CASE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS

In Dove -v- London Borough of Havering [2017] EWCA Civ 156 the Court of Appeal considered a number of procedural issues prior to giving judgment on the substantive point.  The defendants argued that they should have been granted an adjournment of the trial. The judge rejected that application. The judge’s decision was upheld by the Court […]

BOMBARDING THE COURT: AN IMPORTANT POSTSCRIPT

There is an important postscript to the judgment of Lady Justice King in Agarwala -v- Agarwala [2016] EWCA Civ 1252. It sets out the dangers of “bombarding” the court with communications and applications.   It sets out a course of action that may allow courts, in extreme cases, to cease to respond to communications from […]

COSTS BUDGETING: PILOT SCHEME IN THE CHANCERY DIVISION IN LEEDS

 Leeds District Registry has a pilot scheme in relation to costs budgeting. It enables the parties to agree to limit the extent of costs budgeting.  The parties can, by agreement, file a simple costs budget with the Directions Questionnaire. If the court is of the view that the budgets are reasonable and proportionate then an […]

ANOTHER EXPERT WITNESS GOES AWRY: PATENTLY A PROBLEM

It is easy for the non-technical reader to pass over judgments relating to patents. These often involve highly technical issues.  However there is one aspect of the judgment in Thoratec Europe Limited -v- AIS GMBH Aachen Innovative Solutions [2016] EWHC 2637 (Pat) that may have a familiar ring.  It illustrates: The importance of case management […]

COSTS BUDGETING IS APPROPRIATE AND NECESSARY IN A HIGH VALUE CASE : BUT IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE TO ORDER A SPLIT TRIAL

In Signia Wealth Limited -v- Marlborough Trust Company Limited [2016] EWHC 2141 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh considered two issues relating to case management: whether costs budgeting should apply and whether a split trial was appropriate. KEY POINTS Costs budgeting A high value action stayed within the costs budgeting regime because the claim form limited the […]

UNNECESSARY MATERIAL, DUPLICATION AND INFORMATION OVERLOAD: ANOTHER JUDGE’S LAMENT

The observations of Mr Justice Kerr at the end of his judgment in Kimmance -v- General Medical Council [2016] EWHC 1808 (Admin) contains some familiar themes in relation to the preparation of cases: bundles, citations and skeletons. “The parties should not lodge thousands of pages of documents to cater for a chance of one in […]

PROVING THINGS 25: ATTEMPTS TO SMUGGLE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS DO NOT HELP (AND CARRY NO WEIGHT)

 There are interesting observations in the judgment of His Honour Judge Hacon today in Raft Limited -v- Freestyle of Haven Limited [2016] EWHC 1711 (IPEC) in relation to an attempt to avoid a limit on the number of witnesses who could be called at trial. “Extra witnesses may not be thrown in just in case […]