March/April 2012 #42 – Law Journals

Norwich Pharmacal Orders: Converting a try

K &

Louise Millington-Roberts writes on a landmark ruling for rights holders in the events industry ‘Proportionate measures must be put in place by rights holders, otherwise they will be unable to take action against ticket resellers. Conditions under which tickets are sold must include provision that they shall not be re-sold, transferred or advertised for sale.’ …

Continue reading "Norwich Pharmacal Orders: Converting a try"

This post is only available to members.

Evidence: Pass the soap

Peter McHugh takes a view on hot-tubbing ‘Giving evidence in court can be a difficult task at the best of times. Some experts are better than others at delivering their evidence. In the hot tub some experts may feel at ease within that situation and some experts may struggle, especially when under pressure.’ The practice …

Continue reading "Evidence: Pass the soap"

This post is only available to members.

Injunctions: Parties behaving badly

Luke Pearce examines the impact of a recent judgment on anti-suit injunctions and vexatious conduct ‘It was necessary, in order to grant a non-contractual anti-suit injunction, to be satisfied of two conditions: first, that England was the natural forum for the resolution of the dispute; and secondly that the conduct of JFC was vexatious, oppressive …

Continue reading "Injunctions: Parties behaving badly"

This post is only available to members.

Costs: Who paid the ferryman? Damned if you do, damned if you might have done

Mark Surguy assesses the impact of Germany v Flatman ‘Section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 gives the court power to determine by whom the costs of litigation shall be paid. This can include a non-party and a non-party can include a party’s solicitor.’ The scope of the jurisdiction to make a non-party costs …

Continue reading "Costs: Who paid the ferryman? Damned if you do, damned if you might have done"

This post is only available to members.

CPR Part 36: Pitch perfect

Michael Morton outlines recent case law considering the use and practice of CPR Part 36 ‘To eliminate chance and create certainty, litigators will look to the precise effects of CPR 36 to ensure successful recovery of costs.’ An assessment of recent case law from a small road traffic accident claim to a substantial multi-party building …

Continue reading "CPR Part 36: Pitch perfect"

This post is only available to members.

Trusts: Silence is golden

Claire Stewart contemplates recent case law on disputed ownership in the light of Jones v Kernott ‘Traditionally, a constructive trust will arise in equity where it would be unconscionable to allow a legal owner of a property to retain the beneficial ownership of it.’ This article will consider the recent judgment of the Court of …

Continue reading "Trusts: Silence is golden"

This post is only available to members.

Privilege: Prudential and privilege: a re-match

Julian Copeman and Heather Gething look ahead to the Prudential appeal ‘The Law Society, the Bar Council and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) all intervened in the Court of Appeal, and have also been granted permission to intervene in the Supreme Court.’ On 13 October 2010 the Court of Appeal …

Continue reading "Privilege: Prudential and privilege: a re-match"

This post is only available to members.

Experts: Manchester ‘hot-tubbing’ pilot – evidence so far

P D

Professor Dame Hazel Genn reports on the Manchester Concurrent Evidence Pilot ‘The evidence to date suggests that the main benefits of the concurrent evidence procedure are to be found in the efficiency of the process, and the ease with which evidence can be given and differences of views examined and assessed.’ The Jackson Report on …

Continue reading "Experts: Manchester ‘hot-tubbing’ pilot – evidence so far"

This post is only available to members.

Intellectual Property: Spicy, fruity but not confidential

Austin Flynn and Paul Flynn discuss the recent and scathing judgment in the Reggae Reggae Sauce case ‘The onus rests on Mr Bailey to prove on the balance of probabilities the existence and breach of a contractual agreement between himself and Mr Graham.’ In a case that may unfortunately be better remembered for the comments …

Continue reading "Intellectual Property: Spicy, fruity but not confidential"

This post is only available to members.