I'm interested in…

  • Strategy & Procedure
  • Motor
  • Fraud
  • Disease
  • Catastrophic Injury
  • Commercial Insurance
  • Costs
  • Liability
  • Local Authority
  • Professional Indemnity
  • Scotland

Jackson in Action

In our regular monthly round up of cases we look at the effects of the changes to the Civil Procedure Rules under the Jackson Reforms:

Relief from sanctions/trivial breaches: In Freeborn & Anor v Daniel Robert De Almeida Marcal (t/a Dan Marcal Architects) (2017) Coulson J, sitting in the High Court was critical of parties who play games over "minor procedural glitches". The defendant had, in accordance with a letter that they had received from court, served costs budgets 7 days before a CCMC. The claimant argued that the budget had been served late, pointing to the requirements of CPR r.3.13, which specifies that budgets should be filed 21 days before a CCMC "unless the court otherwise orders" (the claimant arguing that the letter from court which the defendant had followed was not an order). Mr Justice Coulson held that the defendant had complied with r.3.13 as they had followed the court letter, but if relief from sanctions was required, then relief would have been granted. 28.11.17

Recovery of pre-LASPO additional liabilities/transfer of CFA: In Budana v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust & Anor (2017), the Court of Appeal confirmed that a CFA that had been transferred from one firm of solicitors to another, had led to a novation of the contract, rather than an assignment of the rights under it. Nevertheless, the additional liabilities incurred by the claimant under the CFA were still recoverable against the defendant for the purpose s.44 (6) of the transitional provisions of LASPO. 5.12.17

Share your views

Please complete your details below to share your views. All comments are moderated and only your name and comment will be visible.

Your Comment

This information is intended as a general discussion surrounding the topics covered and is for guidance purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. DWF is not responsible for any activity undertaken based on this information.

Top