header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Don’t be vague in your points of dispute

30 June 2023
Issue: 8031 / Categories: Legal News , Costs , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
128470
It pays to be specific when setting out points of dispute, as Laura Rees, council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, explains in this week’s NLJ

Rees refers to a recent Court of Appeal case of Ainsworth v Stewarts Law, which was ‘the first case of its kind to raise an issue with the content of the points of dispute’.

Rees looks at this case and other recent caselaw where ‘generic points of dispute’ were found wanting. She shares advice on how to make points of dispute specific and clear, while acknowledging that this can be a difficult and arduous task.

Rees writes: ‘What is clear is that specific items and entries need to be itemised, with a clear objection made for each entry as to why the time is being challenged.’ 

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
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
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll