header-logo header-logo

02 June 2023 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 8027 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Civil way , CPR , Fees
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 2 June 2023

Short-changing the court; overseas and watched; standard orders ready; (till the next time); too much relief.

RETURN OF THE ASS

The claimants’ solicitors authorised the county court at Central London to debit the court fee from their PBA account when they sought to issue Pt 8 proceedings by post in Peterson and another v Howard De Walden Estates Ltd [2023] EWHC 929 (KB), [2023] All ER (D) 29 (May). Alas, the authority was for £24 short of the prescribed fee and so court staff bounced back. That fatally meant that the deadline for applying for an order under s 48(3) of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993) was missed. The claimants sought relief under CPR 3.10, which gives the court power to rectify where there has been an ‘error of procedure’. Mr Justice Eyre, on appeal, affirmed the decision below, holding that there was no jurisdiction to grant relief as, although CPR 3.10 could be used to remedy defects in the form of proceedings

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Heather Gibson

Freeths—Heather Gibson

Freeths strengthens national tax team with Heather Gibson appointment

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed plans to create specialist rape and serious sex offences courtrooms at every Crown Court
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
back-to-top-scroll