|
|
|
|
| Good faith agreements and agreements to agree. TCC. 24th March 2000, |
| by His Honour Judge Humphrey Lloyd : Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Impact of ADR on Limitation of Action : s14A Limitation Act action ? impact of ADR on right to limitation ? solicitor negligently failed to advise on impact of partnership agreement on joint liability for previously incurred debts of another partner. Ch.Div. 21st December 2000 |
| by His Honour Judge Neuberger. : Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Defendant penalised for making a written offer as opposed to a CPR 36.3 payment in : A subsequent payment in was beaten in court (but not the writen offer). Court stated 36.3 offer is more secure. Defendant ordered to pay half the costs - claimant had been precipitate and unreasonable. CA. 15th November 2000. |
| by Simon Brown LJ, Sir Anthony Evans. Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Interpretation of settlement : Settlement agreement contained a Med/Arb Clause. The scope of the agreement referred to court for interpretation : Whilst this concerned an application for a stay to arbitration the real issue between the parties was whether or not one party had been bound to make certain payments and thus the other was entitled to recover on the settlement indemnity. The answer to both was YES. Comm. Div. High Court. 25th January 2000. |
| by The Honourable Mr JusticeLangley : Crown Copyright. |
|
|
|
| Coercion - duress - undue influence : Compromise agreement induced by threat of non supply of material in relation to work in progress. Compromise set aside. TCC. 6th November 2000. |
| by His Honour Judge Dyson. : Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| ADR : Summary judgement. Successful appeal against a summary judgement : Trial ordered but stayed pending ADR ? aggressive correspondence by solicitor criticised by the court. C.A. 4th July 2000. |
| by Vice Chancellor Sir Richard Scott : Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Medical claims suitable for ADR : Court considered the grounds for striking out under both the old regime and under the CPR. Makes a brief reference to mediation and overriding objectives. 29th February 2000. |
| by Lord Justices Stuart-Smith & Brooke : Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Costs : Settlement offer : Claimant rejected offers and went on to achieve a victory by a slim margin. Costs awarded at 33% overall and at 15% after the final offer. TCC. 8th May 2000. |
| by Colin Reese QC. Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Action for contribution to a settlement agreement by a co-contractor. Without prejudice negotiations led to settlement terms by insurance carriers of asbestosis claims. The applicant sought disclosure of the terms to establish the extent of his liability. Disclosure ordered. CA. 30th June 2000. |
| by Pill LJ, Sir Murray Stuart-Smith. Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| A sealed offer to be effective as to a costs award does not have to include costs : merely a clear indication as to whether or not costs are included. TCC. 28th November 2000 |
| by His Honour Judge Richard Seymour : Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Mediation : non legal outcomes : appology. Whilst the court, in rejecting an application to appeal noted that this case was not suitable for mediation, the primary remedy, viz an appology was not one open to the court, whereas that is something frequently used as a key to a settlement. CA. 1st December 2000. |
| by Arden LJ; Peter Gibson LJ. : Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Admissibility of disclosures during mediation of family dispute denied. Inner House Court of Session. 10th November 2000. |
| by Lord President; Lords Milligan, Nimmo Smith, Bonomy, Allanbridge. Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Indemnity costs less ADR cost : Cost hearing on failed s24/25 CPR applications by a domestic house builders who provided no final account and refused to wait for the defendant?s valuation report.TCC. 8th March 2000. |
| by His Hon Judge Wilcox : Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| "Without prejudice" correspondence : Admissibility. Ch.Div. 12th April 2000. |
| by His Honour Judge Neuberger. Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Court held that the content of "Without prejudice" correspondence should not be disclosed in court. NB : Nonetheless the correspondence facilitates the formulations of questions for cross examination. Ch.Div. 8th November 2000. |
| by His Honour Judge Neuberger. Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Stay of proceedings pending ADR : The house purchaser claimant?s defendant solicitor failed to ensure NHBC cover for a property. The court ordered three party ADR involving NHBC & Solicitor. CA. 13th October 2000 |
| by Mance LJ; Mrs Justice Smith : Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
| Privilege : Without prejudice : Justice requires that where one party discloses without prejudice material to the court, the other party can also rely on that material in that and other trials. C.A. 26th July 2000 |
| by Lord Justices Waller & Clarke : Crown Copyright |
|
|
|
Privilege : Without prejudice : Burden of proof -to pierce the veil - unambiguous impropriety - not satisfied by an implausible case. CA. 20th March 2000.
|
| by Beldam LJ, Robert Walker LJ. : Crown Copyright |
 |
Our publications are provided in PDF format, in order to view them you will need Adobe's free Acrobat reader. Acrobat reader can be downloaded from Adobe by following the link to your left. |
|
|
