Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The just case management solution is to hear the remitted matters and the claimant’s summary judgment application separately and sequentially, with the remitted matters first, and not to stay the summary judgment application, balancing the interests of both parties and avoiding undue prejudice to other litigants.
Source excerpt
The court ordered that the first trial shall deal with all issues except validity of claimants' standing, which will be addressed only if necessary after the main trial. No order was made for cyber security expert evidence or narrative documents at this stage. Disclosure and expert issues were clarified, with permission for separate experts and precise formulation of disclosure issues.
Source excerpt
The appellant failed to demonstrate that the trial had begun in a meaningful sense, as only ordinary case management and administrative matters occurred before the prosecution offered no evidence. No substantial judicial rulings or exceptional case management were undertaken. Therefore, only a cracked trial fee is payable.
Source excerpt
The EAT dismissed Mr Grantham’s appeal, holding that any failure to consider medical evidence about autism was not material to the strike out and reconsideration decisions.
The High Court refused a claimants’ application to stop the estate’s representative pursuing a Ukrainian matrimonial property regime defence and counterclaim.
The court found that, where the parties had agreed to provide the requested customer files and related documents, no finding of breach was necessary. However, the selection of additional files must be objective and representative, not unilaterally determined by dfcu. The court ordered staged disclosure of the 40 requested customer files and 20 additional files, with deadlines and a process for resolving disputes. The court declined to order further witness statements or disclosure where the Claimants had not shown a possible failure to comply or where the information sought was already provid…
Source excerpt
The Court declined to dismiss the Claimant’s disclosure requests (items 6-19) at this stage, holding it premature given the unexpired deadline and unresolved communication mechanisms. The Court adopted the Defendant’s proposal for a single-stage hearing for disclosure and CMP applications, finding it more efficient and appropriate given the nature of the issues and the need for expedition. The Court set directions for provision of gists and other case management matters, inviting parties to agree a draft order accordingly.
Source excerpt
The appeal was struck out because the appellant failed to comply with directions to clarify jurisdictional grounds and did not respond, justifying strike out under Rule 8(2)(a).
Source excerpt
The appeal was struck out because the appellant failed to comply with the tribunal's direction to provide a copy of the decision being appealed.
Source excerpt
The Defendant did not act in a manner consistent with ambush; disclosure of surveillance evidence was reasonable given procedural chronology and cooperation. The Claimant had a fair opportunity to address the evidence. The time and circumstances of disclosure do not warrant exclusion under case management powers. Surveillance evidence is admitted.
Source excerpt
Explore more
