Judgment in default can be set aside by a plaintiff in order to renew proceedings. Citations: Times 21-Mar-1997 Statutes: County Court Rules 1981 Order 37 r 4 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.84461
Even if a case is quite unsuitable for automatic directions, the plaintiff has an obligation to apply instead for specific manual directions to stand in their stead. It would be wrong to allow a plaintiff to escape from the discipline of the automatic directions timetable simply by issuing an application seeking an order that the … Continue reading Cockeril v Tambrands Limited: CA 21 May 1998
The automatic directions timetable ceases to run on the stay of proceedings; a date was needed. Automatic directions were ousted if an order was made staying the action, even if it was likely that the stay would only be a temporary one. The rationale underlying the ouster of automatic directions was that the stay of … Continue reading Whitehead v Avon County Council (2): CA 10 Feb 1997
The Small Claims procedure includes a full power for a District Judge to grant injunctions and otherwise, including in this case making an order for specific performance. Citations: Ind Summary 26-Jun-1995, Times 02-May-1995 Statutes: County Court Rules 1981 19 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.82637
Appeals under the Family Proceedings Rules had to be read in conjunction with the CCR Order 37 r 6, and the judge hearing the appeal had discretion to substitute his own view for that of the court below. This is different from what applies on appeal to the Court of Appeal. In particular the judge … Continue reading Marsh v Marsh: CA 1 Mar 1993
The plaintiffs said the first defendant had defrauded them of substantial sums, and implicated other defendants. They claimed against five defendants variously for conspiracy to defraud and deceit and for breach of warranty. They also sought to trace the sum of andpound;383,872 paid under a mistake of fact induced by fraud, into an account with … Continue reading A v C (Note): ChD 1980
The court made a Mareva order with ancillary disclosure orders for the purpose of enabling the plaintiffs to trace property acquired by the defendant and so take steps to seize that property if it derived from their assets. Judges: Templeman J Citations: Unreported, 26 May 1978 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – A … Continue reading London and County Securities Ltd v Caplin: ChD 26 May 1978
Damages were awarded for a breach of statutory duty where the claimant had suffered loss or damage by reason of the breach. The publication at issue went beyond reporting and ‘it reached deeply into the substance of the matter which the court had closed its doors to consider’. A mental health review tribunal is a … Continue reading Pickering v Liverpool Daily Post and Echo Newspapers plc: HL 1991
An application for submission of details supporting an application for outline planning permission had been made within the time limit. However, following an inquiry the Secretary of State had indicated that approval would be appropriate in respect of a more limited area, and had invited submission of detailed plans and information relating to the reduced … Continue reading Inverclyde District Council v Lord Advocate: 1981
Claim for costs against third party local authority, Croydon LBC after four day private law fact finding hearing. F said that M had fabricated illnesses both in herself and the child leading to the LA being asked to prepare a report. That report failed to allow for established guidance on the topic, leading to the … Continue reading HB v PB: FD 9 Jul 2013
The appellant, liquidator of two South African companies, had made a successful without notice application for an asset freezing order. He believed that the defendants had stripped the companies of substantial assets. The order was set aside for want of jurisdiction, because it had not been ancillary to any proceedings which had even been formulated … Continue reading Fourie v Le Roux and others: HL 24 Jan 2007
The case concerned restrictions on the rent that a property owner could charge. The restrictions were applied to existing leases. It was said that the restrictions brought into play the second paragraph of Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention. Held: The second paragraph reserves to States the right to enact such laws … Continue reading Mellacher and Others v Austria: ECHR 19 Dec 1989
A non-party affected by an order but not served can apply to set order aside after being joined. Times 24-Mar-1997 County Court Rules 1981 Order 37 2; Order 15 r1 England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 30 November 2021; Ref: scu.82216
The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. Held: The appeal was dismissed. For Article 9 to be engaged (aside from certain other threshold conditions) the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005
An expert witness admitted signing a joint report but without agreeing to it. The claimant who had lost his case now pursued her in negligence. The claimant appealed against a finding that the expert witness was immune from action. Held: The appeal succeeded. The immunity from civil suit in negligence or contract for an expert … Continue reading Jones v Kaney: SC 30 Mar 2011
The defendant prison governor had intercepted a prisoner’s letter to the Crown Office for the purpose of raising proceedings to have the governor committed for an alleged contempt of court. Held: The governor was in contempt of court. Subject to any legislation altering the situation, a prisoner retains all his rights that are not taken … Continue reading Raymond v Honey: HL 4 Mar 1981
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
References: [1986] AC 965, [1986] 2 WLR 1051, [1986] 2 All ER 409 Coram: Lord Goff of Chieveley A claim had been made against charterers by the ship owners, and in turn by the charterers against their sub-charterers. Notice of motion were issued after arbitration awards were not accepted. When heard, costs awards were made, … Continue reading Aiden Shipping Co Ltd v Interbulk Ltd (The ‘Vimeira’): HL 1986
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts