Tag Archives: Mitchell

NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET FILED LATE: THE DECISION IN DETAIL

We have looked, briefly, at the Court of Appeal decision in Jamadar -v- Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] EWCA Civ 1001. I am grateful to Aaron Vodden   of  Hempsons for sending me a copy of the transcript which has only recently become available. One interesting feature of the case was the claimant’s failure […]

BRITISH GAS HAS PRODUCED SOME HOT AIR: DENTON APPLIED NOT CONVERTED

I have already seen several headlines, and numerous commentaries, that mention the “hard line” taken by the Court of Appeal in British Gas Trading -v- Oak Cash & Carry Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 153.  The case is not as draconian as some commentators (or certainly some headlines) indicate.  It is wise to read certain parts of […]

DENTON AND DELAY IN APPLYING FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE PRINCIPLES CANNOT BE CASH AND CARRIED AWAY

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in British Gas Trading -v- Oak Cash & Carry Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 153 reiterates the significance of the Denton principles. It also emphasises the importance of applying for relief from sanctions promptly. It was not the breach itself that led to the disruption of litigation but the […]

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF FUNDING

Relief from sanctions following late service of the notice of funding was granted by Mr Justice Simon in Jackson -v- Thompson Solicitors (& others) [2015] EWHC 549 (QB). THE CASE The claimant had failed in an action against multiple defendants and was ordered to pay the costs. One of the defendants (Lord Prescott) entered into […]

POST MITCHELL PRE-DENTON RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL: MITCHELL PRINCIPLES WERE NOT HERE TO STAY

The appeal in Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd -v- Sinclair [2015] EWCA Civ 774 involves the Court of Appeal considering the Mitchell/Denton divide. KEY POINTS The Court overturned a decision, made post-Mitchell but prior to Denton, where a judge refused to lift a stay. A stay is different to an order striking out an action. […]

INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST RESPONDENT IN RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATION: WHAT A WASTE?

There is a brief report on Lawtel* of the decision of Popplewell J in Viridor Waste Management Ltd -v- Veolia Es Ltd (QBD (Comm) 22/05/2015. THE CASE The claimant was bringing an action for £27 million unjust enrichment. The claim form was served towards the end of the four month period. An extension of time […]

HELL IT WAS IN “THAT FEBRILE TIME”: OSTRICHES, MITCHELL, DENTON AND THE “BRILLIANT READJUSTMENT”

There are some interesting observations made by Lord Dyson MR in The English Experience of Access to Justice Reform. In particular the look back at the “febrile” atmosphere that Mitchell created and the rationale of the subsequent “revision” in Denton. THE SPEECH “18. A need for flexibility in relation to the implementation of the Jackson […]