header-logo header-logo

09 January 2026
Issue: 8144 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 2 & 9 January 2026

Costs

Estate of Euan McIntyre Lindsay (deceased) and another v Outlook Finance Ltd (in liquidation) and another [2025] EWHC 3241 (KB)

The King’s Bench Division ruled on consequential matters following the setting aside of a 2014 judgment (the Manchester judgment) obtained by fraud. The court had previously established that the judgment should be set aside against both Outlook Finance Ltd (first defendant) and Mr Butcher (second defendant) due to fraud perpetrated by Derek Fradgley (deceased), even though Mr Butcher was not complicit in the fraud. On costs, the court awarded the Lindsay family (claimants) their costs on the standard basis, subject to a 25% reduction to account for their initially unfounded allegations of fraud against Mr Butcher. The court ordered repayment of previously paid costs from the Manchester proceedings and set aside the earlier cost assessment. Permission to appeal was granted on the point of whether the equitable jurisdiction to set aside a judgment extends to setting it aside against a non-fraudulent party, but refused on the second ground concerning

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
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?
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
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
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll