Jackson in Action: case law
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/late service of evidence:In Sloutsker v Romana (2015) the pressure of work was considered a good reason for the failure to serve evidence for a substantial interim application by the prescribed deadline was a serious breach. Relief from sanctions was granted by Warby J sitting in the Queen’s Bench Decision despite the applicant not have a good reason for the default. Held that the breach was far from being at the extreme end of the scale of seriousness, was not deliberate and had had no serious effect on the efficient progress or cost of the litigation.
The following are cases where the court had regard to the test in Mitchell and/or Denton, notwithstanding the fact that they were not applications for relief from sanctions per se:
Relief from sanctions regime/security for costs: In Peak Hotels & Resorts Ltd v Tarek Investments Ltd & Ors (2015) where an application to extend a deadline to provide security for costs was made before the deadline expired, the court should have regard to the overriding objective, rather than principles set out in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd  EWCA Civ 1537,  1 W.L.R. 795 and Denton v TH White Ltd  EWCA Civ 906,  1 W.L.R. 3926. Sitting in the Chancery Division and allowing the application, Hildyard J held that weight should be attached to the fact that the applicant had offered to make a significant part payment in a short space of time.
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.