header-logo header-logo

31 January 2025
Issue: 8102 / Categories: Legal News , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Do not run this defence!

Former district judge Stephen Gold covers a recent landlord and tenant case that was leapfrogged to the Court of Appeal due to its importance, in this week’s NLJ. The case, Switaj v McClenaghan, concerns a check-out fee.

Gold also covers a case where a credit hire claim ‘was complicated by the fact that the claimant’s damaged car had no current MOT’. The ‘so-called alternative causation defence’ was used. Gold writes: ‘Remember not to run this defence. The Court of Appeal disliked it.’

Gold also covers debt relief moratoria—'the creditor’s nightmare’. 
Issue: 8102 / Categories: Legal News , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll