header-logo header-logo

CIVIL LITIGATION

22 February 2007
Issue: 7261 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Aird v Prime Meridian Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 1866, [2006] All ER (D) 358 (Dec)

(i) When a joint experts’ statement is ordered under CPR 35.12(3), the experts are obliged to produce it and are in breach of their duty to the court if they do not. Such a statement is for use in the proceedings, and so is not protected by privilege. However, it is not an admission by the parties, nor can it be characterised as an admission by the experts, and so the parties are not bound by it.
(ii) The court cannot order the parties to mediate. However:

“The court can and does order a stay of proceedings for mediation, almost always when all parties have indicated that they are willing to try. The court may also perhaps, on occasions, consider making an adverse costs order against a party who is shown to have unreasonably refused to participate in mediation, although I personally regard that as a power to be exercised with caution.

Since the court cannot order the parties to participate in mediation, neither can the court make orders stipulating the details of how the parties should conduct a mediation. The most the court can do is to encourage” (per Lord Justice May at para 6).

Issue: 7261 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll