header-logo header-logo

15 January 2009
Issue: 7352 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Law digest: Civil litigation

Tombstone Ltd v Raja [2008] EWCA Civ 1444, [2008] All ER (D) 180 (Dec)

(i) Where the subject-matter of an application is governed by rules in the
CPR, it should be dealt with by the court in accordance with the CPR and not by exercising the court’s inherent jurisdiction. (ii) Practitioners are advised to note the risk of the court’s negative reaction to unnecessarily long written submissions. Skeleton arguments should not be prepared as verbatim scripts to be read out. Good skeleton arguments provide an agenda for the hearing, a summary of the main points, propositions and arguments to be developed orally, a useful way of noting citations and references, a convenient place for making cross references, a time-saving means of avoiding unnecessary dictation to the court and laborious and pointless note-taking by the court. They are aids to oral advocacy, not written briefs to be used as substitutes for oral advocacy (per Lord Justice Mummery at [125]–[128]).

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
back-to-top-scroll