header-logo header-logo

21 November 2014 / Steven Chiddicks
Issue: 7631 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

An own goal

chiddicks

Steven Chiddicks covers a Jersey case that paves the way for non-party costs orders

There are few, if any, proceedings in Jersey which have gone on as long as Leeds United Football Club’s (LUFC) claim against The Phone-in-Trading-Post Limited t/a AdMatch (AdMatch). In December 2005, LUFC issued a claim concerning £190,400 which AdMatch had received following an agreement that it would act as an agent for LUFC in the selling of match and season tickets by credit cards.

AdMatch had defended the action on the basis that there was a set-off, however, following AdMatch’s failure to comply with certain unless orders, LUFC received judgment in May 2011 for the claimed amount of £190,400.

It was not until April 2014 that the Royal Court heard the parties on the issue of the costs of the litigation and it delivered its decision on 5 September 2014 ([2014] JRC167).

An unsuccessful appeal

LUFC has previously had the benefit of a landmark ruling from the Court of

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll