News Category 3
Exit Mitchell, Enter Denton - Ian Miller, 1 Chancery Lane
07/08/14. Our jurisdiction generally does not favour laws (whether judge- or parliament-made) which fail to take account of what is just in the individual circumstances of the particular case. The common law prides itself in being able to adapt to new situations to yield what we would generally understand to be the ‘right’ result. This is a priority of our legal system and Mitchell fell foul of it – whether because it overstepped the mark in the first place or whether because it was wrongly interpreted. It is a strength of our system that it has been able to correct itself within such a short space of time.
Exit Mitchell and enter Denton (or perhaps it will become known as ‘Decadent’). The Court of Appeal explains that when approaching rule 3.9 the first stage is to identify and assess the seriousness and significance of the ‘failure to comply with any rule, practice direction or court order’. If the breach is neither significant nor serious then...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/DNY59
Gray v Botwright - Paul Oakley, 1 Essex Court
06/08/14. Before Lord Justice Jackson, Lord Justice Mccombe and Lady Justice Macur on 9th July 2014. Counsel for Appellant: Paul Oakley, 1 Essex Court, Temple EC4Y 9AR. Solicitors for Appellant: Hatch Brenner LLP, 4 Theatre St, Norwich NR2 1QY. Counsel for Respondent: Nadia Whitaker. Solicitors for Respondent: Clyde & Co.
On 5th July 2010 Mr Gray was driving along the A143 in Bradwell, Norfolk. His intended route of travel was to the right into Long Lane. This is part of a 5-route junction controlled by 11 traffic lights and drivers intending to turn into Long Lane do so by way of slip lane with a filter arrow. No lights control the slip lane. Mr Gray was familiar with the layout of the junction and phasing of its traffic lights as he lives locally.
Mr Gray brought his car to a halt behind another vehicle on the slip lane whilst indicating to the right.
Mr Botwright was driving in the opposite direction along the A143 and faced traffic lights about 50 metres before the slip lane in which Mr Gray was waiting. It was alleged, and at trial District Judge Pugh found as a fact, that Mr Botwright drove through the traffic light when it was at red but that he was not travelling “significantly in excess” of...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/drudoran
Jet2.com Limited v Huzar and the Extraordinary Circumstances Exception - Frances Mcclenaghan, 1 Chancery Lane
03/08/14. There is a phrase in Northern Ireland, where I am from: “as clear as muck”, which is what comes to mind when attempting to fathom the meaning of the ‘extraordinary circumstances’ exception to compensation under the Denied Boarding Regulations (Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004). Reading the Court of Appeal’s decision in Jet2.com Limited v Huzar (‘Huzar’, [2014] EWCA Civ 791), it is clear that I am in good company.
Whilst this appeal concerns fixed compensation for flight delay under the Regulations rather than personal injury it is of interest to travel law practitioners whose work encompasses both specialisms (as well as the numerous other international conventions engaged when holiday makers...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/cb34inc
Less of the Male, Pale and Stale? Judicial Appointment Statistics Published - Thomas Crockett, 1 Chancery Lane
27/07/14. The Bar is quite properly concerned about diversity amongst its ranks. However attention yesterday was paid to diversity amongst those who sit a little higher up than counsel in court.
The 10th set of Judicial Appointments Commission Statistics on this subjecty were published on 5 June 2014. They show change is slowly occurring as more women than ever have been appointed to judicial office in the eighteen selection exercises completed between October 2013 and March 2014, during which no less than 263 candidates were recommended for appointment to judicial office. In their press release however...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/sellingoutstieglitz
Defective Premises Act 1972 and Claims Under The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 - Andrew Mckie, Clerksroom
17/07/14. The Defective Premises Act 1972 represents an important piece of legislation when dealing with slipping and tripping claims that may occur on a landlord’s premises. Claimant lawyers in practice, will find that the Act is particularly useful in dealing with claims where it is likely to be difficult establishing liability under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 because the landlord is not the occupier of the property.
It is an important cause of action because any claimant who is injured in the landlord’s property can bring an action under the Defective Premises Act 1972 and it is not just limited to tenants of the property...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/marcoventuriniautieri
More Articles...
- Bite Size RTA Case Law Update - Bronia Hartley, Zenith Chambers
- Service of Supplementary Witness Statements in a Post-Mitchell World - Jack Harding, 1 Chancery Lane
- The Mesothelioma Act 2014 - Alan Joliffe, IBB Solicitors
- Greater Clarity From SRA for Successor Practices Is Needed - Simon Gibson, SGI Legal
![Appeal judge rules that credit hire company has no costs liability following a finding of fundamental dishonesty in personal injury case: RSA v. Fastrack Solutions Limited [2023] 4 WLUK 92 - David Bowden, Erimus Chambers](/content/images/resized/images/stories/carkeys_72_72.jpg)
