Category: High Court

Government announces 15 year limitation period for “shoddy workmanship” claims

Extension of limitation period for claims against property developers for unsafe cladding will lead to further breach of building regulation claims.

Post date 6 July 2021
Post author By Shrey Bahl
Post categories In Civil Litigation, CPR, High Court, Litigation, Professional Negligence, Property Litigation
Tags grenfell, housing secretary, labour, legislation, Property Disputes, Property Litigation

Litigation Lessons: “Weak and speculative” £3.7m professional negligence claimants awarded just £2K

A recent case of Beattie Passive Norse Ltd Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd highlights the importance of causation and repercussions of providing an inaccurate value of a claim.

Post date 4 June 2021
Post author By Erica Truong
Post categories In Breach of Contract, Civil Litigation, Civil Procedure Rules, Court of Appeal, CPR, High Court, Legal Negligence, Litigation, Negligent Conveyancer, Part 36, Pre-action Protocol, Professional Negligence, Standard costs
Tags Claims against conveyancers, Claims against Solicitors, costs, Professional Negligence

business interruption insurance claim solicitors

Commercial leases not frustrated by COVID-19 restrictions, High Court rules

The High Court has ruled that commercial leases were not “temporarily frustrated” by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and therefore the tenants were still obliged to pay rents to…

Post date 26 May 2021
Post author By Sivakumaran Sivathillainathan
Post categories In Breach of Contract, Business and Property Courts, Chancery Division, Civil Litigation, Contractual duties, COVID-19, High Court, HMCTS, Landlord, Litigation, News, Property Litigation, Summary judgment, Tenant, Uncategorized
Tags Breach of contract, Civil Litigation, commercial lease, Frustration, High Court, Judgments, Landlord and Tenant

High Court rules COVID-19 self-isolation counts as force majeure not breach of contract

In Dwyer (UK) Franchising Ltd v. Fredbar Ltd & Bartlett [2021] EWHC 1218 (Ch), the High Court ruled that self-isolating due to coronavirus (COVID-19) counted as ‘force majeure’,…

Post date 25 May 2021
Post author By Sivakumaran Sivathillainathan
Post categories In Act of God, Breach of Contract, Civil Litigation, Contractual duties, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Force Majeure, High Court, HMCTS, Litigation, News
Tags Breach of contract, Civil Litigation, Contractual Duties, Force Majeure, High Court, Judgments, Litigation

Court of Appeal assesses swap mis-selling complaint under FCA DISP

The Court of Appeal recently analysed a swap mis-selling complaint submitted by the Claimant under the FCA Dispute Resolution scheme (“DISP”), which complaint would stop time running for the purposes of a making a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (“FOS”).

Post date 7 May 2021
Post author By Sophia Hanif
Post categories In Banking Law, Chancery Division, Civil Litigation, Court of Appeal, FCA, Financial Mis-selling, Financial Ombudsman Service, Financial Services Litigation, FOS, High Court, IRHP Reviews
Tags Court of Appeal, DISP, FCA, fca dispute resolution, FCA Review, High Court, Interest Rate Swaps, Lloyds, Mis-selling, Swaps, Swaps Mis-selling

Court refuses to amend developers’ £1.5 million cost budget

The High Court has refused permission for two property developers to amend their initial agreed cost budget of approximately £1.5 million after an attempt to request almost double the sums allowed.

Post date 14 April 2021
Post author By Shrey Bahl
Post categories In Business and Property Courts, Civil Litigation, Civil Procedure Rules, Costs, High Court, Professional Negligence
Tags building, CCMC, cost budget, CPR, development, High Court, Litigation, Professional Negligence

conveyancer solicitor professional negligence

Court of Appeal holds negligent surveyor liable for house’s full diminution of value

In Large v. Hart, the Court of Appeal held a negligent surveyor liable for a house’s full diminution of value as a result of his failure to draw the purchasers’ attention to the property’s defects prior to completion.

Post date 19 February 2021
Post author By Sivakumaran Sivathillainathan
Post categories In Court of Appeal, High Court, Litigation, Negligent Conveyancer, Negligent Solicitors, News, Professional Negligence, Property Litigation

Business Interruption Insurance: Proving Presence of Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Does your insurance policy provide coverage for business interruption as a result of the pandemic? The quickest way to find out is to send our Business Interruption Insurance solicitors your policy and book an advice meeting with our Solicitors and Barristers.

Post date 15 February 2021
Post author By Sivakumaran Sivathillainathan
Post categories In Business Interruption Insurance, Civil Litigation, Coronavirus, COVID-19, High Court, Insurance, NHS
Tags Advice for Businesses, Advice for policyholders, Advice for SMEs, Business Interruption Insurance, Coronavirus, COVID-19, Insurance claims, No win no fee

start court case legal proceedings litigation advice

Business Interruption Insurance Guide: Do I have a Claim?

The Supreme Court handed down its ruling in the FCA test case on business interruption insurance against six insurers. If you are an affected business, you should seek legal advice as soon as possible and our specialist financial services litigation team can be instructed to assist.

Post date 8 February 2021
Post author By Jaron Dosanjh
Post categories In Business Interruption Insurance, Civil Litigation, COVID-19, Damages Based Agreements, DBA, FCA, High Court, Litigation, Supreme Court
Tags Advice for Businesses, Advice for policyholders, BII claim, Business Interruption FAQs, Business Interruption Insurance, FCA Test Case, Insurance claims, No win no fee

newspaper-the-mirror-phone-hacking-roxanne-pallett-proceedings-litigation-offer-settlement-part-36-costs

Claimant wins battle over Defendant’s late acceptance of Part 36 offer in phone hacking claim

In Pallett v MGN Ltd, a case concerning the newspaper phone hacking scandal, the High Court orders the Defendant, owner of the Mirror newspaper, to pay all of the Claimant’s costs of the proceedings, despite arguments that they had accepted the settlement offer outside of the 21 day relevant period under CPR Part 36.

Post date 20 January 2021
Post author By Sophia Hanif
Post categories In Civil Litigation, Defamation, High Court, Part 36, Settlement
Tags costs, cpr 36, defamation, Indemnity Costs, Litigation, Part 36 offers, phone hacking, relevant period

Nothing left to load.