There are, as a result of coronavirus restrictions, bound to be many more remote and virtual hearings as courts, tribunals and other forms of dispute resolution adapt to appropriate new ways of working. The guidance sets out the best ways to prepare for hearings proceeding remotely.
In the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal case of SRA v David Hayhurst, the issue of whether a solicitor is under an implied duty to carry out work that is reasonably incidental to the retainer was examined.
The moratorium on residential evictions comes to an end next week. New guidance is out on how landlords can issue County Court possession proceedings on tenants who have unpaid rent. However commercial tenants are protected from eviction until the end of 2020.
Policyholders with affected claims can expect to hear from their insurers within the next 7 days. Given the complexity of business interruption claims and the legal uncertainty surrounding their enforcement, it is is essential that you seek expert legal advice early in order to prepare your Business Interruption Insurance claim.
In Les Ambassadeurs Club Ltd v Albluewi [2020] EWHC 1313 (QB), the High Court discharged a worldwide freezing order (WFO) obtained by a casino against its customer in finding that the claimant had failed to establish a real risk of dissipation of assets and that there had been material non-disclosures which were directly relevant to the risk.
The London Court of International Arbitration have recently updated their guidance for Arbiters to account for remote Arbitrations. The changes to their rules will come into effect on 1 October 2020 and will only effect arbitrations that commence after this date.
Mediation and arbitration are alternatives to litigation. Mediation is “without prejudice” commercial negotiation to settle a dispute. Arbitration is a private court hearing where parties agree to be bound by the decision of the arbitrator. Both forms of ADR have their pros and cons, and the most effective method depends on the parties themselves and the nature of the dispute.
In a multi million pound breach of contract case, where there was no substantive defence to the claim and the Defendant accepted summary judgment and liability for the Claimant’s costs, the High Court held that a Claimant’s Part 36 offer to accept only 0.3% less than the full sum being claimed was a “genuine offer to settle” under CPR 36.17(5)(e).
If a party completely foregoes mediation will that party be punished in costs? The High Court judgment highlights that although the court cannot compel parties to mediate, an unreasonable refusal to do so is likely to result in costs penalties for a defaulting party. The costs risks of unreasonably refusing to mediate or not responding to a mediation proposal may be severe.
We specialise in detailed assessments where clients are disputing the charges of their former solicitors. If you instruct us we will vigorously fight your case and get a reduction of your bill, which we will consider doing for you on a no win no fee basis. We act for both clients and for the solicitors. Our London lawyers are based just minutes from the Senior Courts Costs Office and can be deployed with speed as the client’s needs and case demands.