header-logo header-logo

The same difference?

29 November 2013 / Bernard Pressman
Issue: 7586 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail
web_pressman

Bernard Pressman analyses the “new” approach of the courts to applications for relief from sanctions

In April this year, a new set of rules for relief from sanctions applications came into force. The old CPR 3.9(1) checklist had been scrapped and replaced with a new obligation on the court: to consider all the circumstances of the case so as to enable it to deal justly with the application including the need (a) for litigation to be conducted efficiently and at proportionate cost, and (b) to enforce compliance with Rules, Practice Directions and orders.

A daunting hurdle

On the face of it, a rather daunting hurdle for an applicant seeking relief. Indeed, there have already been a few cases where the applicants were given short thrift. In Fred Perry Holdings Ltd v Brands Plaza Trading Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 224, [2012] All ER (D) 77 (Jun) (where, even though the application was made long before April 2013, the applicant was unfortunate to come up before a bench that included Jackson LJ) Lewison LJ referred to

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll