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

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’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
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
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll