header-logo header-logo

Keeping it civil

17 August 2016 / Dominic Regan
Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Costs , CPR , Jackson
printer mail-detail

Dominic Regan reviews the litigation year so far

This has been a phenomenal 2016 for those involved in civil litigation. We have acquired a new tort, seen an old head expanded beyond belief and had more twists on the procedural front. And it is still only August.

Supreme work

The Supreme Court has been industrious. In Willers v Joyce [2016] UKSC 43, [2016] All ER (D) 97 (Jul) a full house of nine judges sat and decided, 5-4, that the tort of malicious prosecution includes the prosecution of civil proceedings. The claimant sought damages including the shortfall in costs he incurred after an action against him (alleged to have been motivated by malice), was discontinued at the last moment. The gap was a hefty £2.2m.The claim was leapfrogged to the Supreme Court.

The majority view was that the action was viable and should go to trial. The vociferous minority included Lords Sumption and Neuberger. The President stopped enumerating his grounds for rejecting the

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll