header-logo header-logo

25 February 2010 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 7406 / Categories: Case law , Civil way
printer mail-detail

Civil Way: 26 February 2010

Who needs a banker?; Exchange JS for Pt 8; At your service; Lietigation; The R factor; The late protection game

Who needs a banker?

Watch for the brown envelopes. A litigant in person who is involved in proceedings at the Royal Courts of Justice and does not run a current account may pay in cash at the Mayor’s and City Court as from 1 April 2010 (the Court Funds (Amendment) Rules 2010 (SI 2010/172)).

Exchange JS for Pt 8

A social landlord’s decision on a tenant’s request for consent to an exchange of residences is susceptible to judicial review. But where the Landlord and Tenant Act 1988, s 1 regime applied, any claim arising out of a decision to refuse permission to exchange (or assign) or to grant subject to conditions should normally be brought by ordinary claim (R (on the application of McIntyre and another) v Gentoo Group Ltd [2010] EWHC5 (Admin), [2010] All ER (D) 1 (Jan)).

At your service

CPR Update 51 (reflecting the Civil Procedure (Amendment No

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll