header-logo header-logo

08 January 2016 / Claire Sanders
Issue: 7681 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

​Zero tolerance

nlj_7681_sanders

Claire Sanders analyses wasted costs orders

The decision of Mr Justice Cobb in Re C (a child) (Wasted Costs) [2015] EWHC 3259 (Fam), is yet another reminder to family practitioners that court orders must be obeyed, and complied with to the letter and on time, and that a failure to do so may, as in that case, result in the legal representatives of the non-complying party being penalised with a costs penalty.

Background

In Re C there had been lengthy proceedings concerning a nine-year old child C. C was born in England, where he had lived for the first seven years of his life. In 2013, his mother married an American and C moved to live in the United States of America. The father continued to live in England. For about a year, legal proceedings concerning C continued on both sides of the Atlantic. There was an existing order defining and regulating the arrangements for contact between C and his father made in the United States District Court Southern District of Florida (Miami). On 3 June

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll