Cockerill v Tambrands Ltd; Prolaw Ltd v Adams; Jackson v Pinchbeck: CA 21 May 1998

The court considered consolidated appeals relating to the use of Order 17 Rule 11.

Hirst, Morritt, Brooke LJJ
[1998] 1 WLR 1379, [1998] 3 All ER 97, [1998] EWCA Civ 882
Bailii
County Court Rules Order 17 Rule 11
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBannister v SGB Plc and others and 19 Other Appeals CA 25-Apr-1997
Detailed guidance was given as to several different problems of interpretation of Order 17 r 11, dealing with automatic directions. Definitive guidelines were given for the interpretation of automatic directions and strike out provisions in the . .
CitedGreig Middleton and Company v Denderowicz and Olaleye-Oruene v London Guildhall University (No 1) CA 4-Jul-1997
Direction was given as to the circumstances allowing an appeal out of time after a change in the law affecting a decision after the judgment had been given. Corrections to Bannister v SGB plc made in respect of time calculations in County Court . .
CitedLambert v Mainland Market Ltd CA 1977
A stay which is not a permanent stay does not bring the action to an end; the action becomes ‘static’ but can be restarted at any time. However, in the normal way the Courts seek to enforce settlement agreements and so bring finality to litigation . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510101