header-logo header-logo

03 November 2017 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 7768 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs , Budgeting
printer mail-detail

NLJ costs revision course (Pt 4)

nlj_7768_regan

In his latest update, Dominic Regan tackles lateness, excuses & Denton

  • Applying the Denton test.
  • The saga of Redbourn Group v Fairgate Development.

Surely everyone knows that Denton v White (2014) 1 WLR 3926 is the definitive authority on how to approach an application for relief from a sanction?

However, subtleties abound and the decision in Redbourn Group Ltd v Fairgate Development Ltd [2017] EWHC 1223 (TCC) highlights a number of them.

The facts were simple. The claimant (C) secured judgment in default of service of a defence and counterclaim which were due on 25 January 2017. On 20 January, it sought an extension of time from the defendant who responded with an offer of seven days whereas C wanted 28 days.

Tragically, the defendant neither accepted the seven-day period nor did it apply at once to the court for more time. The period for which FDL had sought an extension expired at 4pm on 22 February. No defence or counterclaim

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

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
back-to-top-scroll