Gilbart v Graham (A Firm)

Gilbart v Graham (A Firm)

The judge erred by failing to consider whether a fair trial was possible in the event that disclosure was completed late; given the incomplete disclosure and inability to instruct an expert, a fair trial was not possible and an adjournment was necessary. The refusal to vacate the trial date was unreasonable.

Parties
Appellant: Gilbart; Respondent: Graham (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Case Management Decision (refusal to Vacate Trial Date)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Case Management, Adjournment of Trial, Solicitor's Negligence, Disclosure of Documents
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Case Management Adjournment of Trial Solicitor's Negligence Disclosure of Documents

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gilbart

Appellant

Graham (A Firm)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Case Management Decision (refusal to Vacate Trial Date)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in refusing to vacate the trial date given incomplete disclosure and inability to instruct an expert
  2. 2 Whether a fair trial was possible in the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred by failing to consider whether a fair trial was possible in the event that disclosure was completed late; given the incomplete disclosure and inability to instruct an expert, a fair trial was not possible and an adjournment was necessary. The refusal to vacate the trial date was unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Trial date vacated
  • Case remitted for further case management