The applicant sought leave to commence proceedings in another jurisdiction. It had earlier obtained a freezing order against the defendant’s assets by giving an undertaking not to issue proceedings without leave. Held: Permission should be given. The purpose of the exceptional procedure of making a freezing order at the same time was to ensure that … Continue reading Bates v Microstar Ltd and Another: ChD 28 Mar 2003
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005
The claimant appealed against an order refusing an extension of time for service of her particulars of claim. She had made the application before the period expired. Held: The rules made a clear distinction between applications made before time expired and those made afterwards. For the latter the rules laid down a checklist. It was … Continue reading Robert v Momentum Services Ltd: CA 11 Feb 2003
The right of a litigant, to choose his solicitor and counsel, is a fundamental one not to be set aside by mere rules of court. In particular the new rules should not be interpreted so as to achieve this. This is part of the principle of equality of arms. Judges: Neuberger J Citations: Times 04-May-1999, … Continue reading Maltez v Lewis: ChD 27 Apr 1999
An asylum seeker had been wrongly accused of riot and sought to sue for damages for malicious prosecution. The Home Secretary, a possible defendant in that action decided to expel the failed asylum seeker. Held: Such an action was in breach of the principle of equality of arms enshrined in the treaty, and deprived the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Quaquah: QBD 20 Jan 2000
Lack of Capacity – Effect on Proceedings The Court was asked ‘First, what is the test for deciding whether a person lacks the mental capacity to conduct legal proceedings on her own behalf (in which case the Civil Procedure Rules require that she has a litigation friend to conduct the proceedings for her)? Second, what … Continue reading Dunhill v Burgin: SC 12 Mar 2014
