Katherine Rees looks at three recent cases in which parties have sought “mercy” from the court
Litigation is not an occupation for anyone made nervous by deadlines. It is an area of practice bristling with time-limits and there is a steady stream of cases which deal with the consequences of missing procedural deadlines.
Those cases which reach the court will usually combine an error with an unforgiving opponent. Is it possible for either side to predict how the court will react to the transgression? Will it say that rules must be obeyed; will it be made impatient by a tussle about technicalities, or will it take the view expressed by HHJ Hodge that “the court must season justice with mercy” (Pannone LLP v Aardvark Digital Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 803, [2011] All ER (D) 100 (Jul))?
Before embarking on satellite litigation about a procedural error, a litigant will want to know what its prospects of success are and be satisfied that it is not just throwing money away on a technical issue.
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
