header-logo header-logo

10 June 2020 / HHJ Karen Walden-Smith
Issue: 7890 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Covid-19
printer mail-detail

Global thinking: making a withdrawal

22349
HHJ Karen Walden-Smith outlines why the courts should take a global approach to applications to resile, while serving the interests of justice
  • Wood v Days Healthcare UK Limited: clear authority as to how the courts are to approach an application to resile from an admission of causation, with a clear shift away from holding a defendant to their admission.
  • Standing back from Wood: justifying the withdrawal of an admission under CPR rule 14.1 is not straightforward.

The decision of the Court of Appeal in Wood v Days Healthcare UK Limited[2017] EWCA Civ 2097, [2017] All ER (D) 92 (Dec)gave clear authority as to how the courts are to approach an application to resile from an admission of causation. Itsignalled a clear shift away from holding a defendant to their admission. Further decisions indicate that it is the interests of the administration of justice which are paramount.

CPR 14.1B

Rule 14.1B of the CPR applies with respect to a pre-action admission of causation made in a case to which

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll