The Lord Chancellor v Former Partnership of Taylor Willcocks Solicitors & Ors [2014] EWHC 3664 (QB) (07 November 2014)

The Lord Chancellor v Former Partnership of Taylor Willcocks Solicitors & Ors [2014] EWHC 3664 (QB) (07 November 2014)

The Master was entitled to refuse relief from sanction for late service of particulars of claim. The breach was serious, no good reason was provided, and the decision was within the reasonable ambit of discretion, consistent with both Mitchell and Denton guidance.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 3664
Parties
Appellant/claimant: The Lord Chancellor (as successor to the Legal Services Commission); 1st Defendants/respondents: Former Partnership of Taylor Willcocks Solicitors; 2nd Defendants: Vallance & Co; 3rd Defendant: Colin Stone; 4th Defendant/respondent: Colin Thorpe; 5th Defendant/respondent: Paul Trim; 6th Defendant/respondent: Sarah Addison
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Grant Extension of Time for Service of Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Extension of Time, Service of Particulars of Claim, CPR 3.9, CPR 7.4, CPR 7.5, CPR 7.6
Civil Procedure Relief From Sanctions Extension of Time Service of Particulars of Claim CPR 3.9 CPR 7.4 CPR 7.5 CPR 7.6

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Lord Chancellor (as successor to the Legal Services Commission)

Appellant/claimant

Former Partnership of Taylor Willcocks Solicitors

1st Defendants/respondents

Vallance & Co

2nd Defendants

Colin Stone

3rd Defendant

Colin Thorpe

4th Defendant/respondent

Paul Trim

5th Defendant/respondent

Sarah Addison

6th Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Grant Extension of Time for Service of Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Master Leslie erred in refusing relief from sanction for late service of particulars of claim under CPR 3.9
  2. 2 Whether the approach in Mitchell v MGN or Denton v White should apply to the application for relief from sanctions

Ratio Decidendi

The Master was entitled to refuse relief from sanction for late service of particulars of claim. The breach was serious, no good reason was provided, and the decision was within the reasonable ambit of discretion, consistent with both Mitchell and Denton guidance.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appellant to pay respondents' costs