header-logo header-logo

Practice

12 January 2012
Issue: 7496 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Hutcheson (formerly known as WER) v Popdog Ltd (formerly known as REW) [2011] EWCA Civ 1580, [2011] All ER (D) 178 (Dec)

Save in exceptional circumstances, three requirements had to be satisfied before an appeal, which was academic as between the parties, might be allowed to proceed. First, the court had to be satisfied that the appeal would raise a point of some general importance. Second, the respondent to the appeal had agreed to it proceeding, or had at least been completely indemnified on costs and was not otherwise inappropriately prejudiced. Finally, the court had to be satisfied that both sides of the argument would be fully and properly ventilated.
 

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

Cadwalader—Matthew Sperry

Cadwalader—Matthew Sperry

Firm grows private wealth practice with transatlantic hire

Michelmores—Jennifer Morrissey

Michelmores—Jennifer Morrissey

Financial services and securities litigation specialist joins as partner in London

Shakespeare Martineau—David Smithen

Shakespeare Martineau—David Smithen

South West land team bolstered by real estate partner hire in Bristol

NEWS
MPs have expressed disappointment after the government confirmed it will not consider updating the parental leave system until at least 2027
Lord Neuberger, former president of the Supreme Court, shares his views on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in this week's NLJ with William Raven
Writing in NLJ this week, Nick Brett and Vicky Lankester of Brett Wilson dissect the chronic failures of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in meeting disclosure obligations. From the Post Office scandal to the collapsed trial of Liam Allan, they highlight how systemic neglect has led to wrongful convictions and miscarriages of justice
In July, the Supreme Court quashed the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, ruling that trial judges had wrongly directed juries to treat profit-motivated Libor submissions as inherently dishonest. In this week’s NLJ, David Stern and James Fletcher of 5 St Andrew’s Hill reflect on the decision
In his latest 'Civil way' column for this week's NLJ, Stephen Gold delivers a witty roundup of procedural updates and judicial oddities. From the rise in litigant-in-person hourly rates (£24 from October) to the Supreme Court’s venue hire options (canapés in Courtroom 1, anyone?), Gold blends legal insight with dry humour
back-to-top-scroll