header-logo header-logo

02 July 2020
Issue: 7893 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week. Keeping it relevant - some tips for litigators

The High Court has made two unusual pre-trial orders within the space of a fortnight, indicating that parties ‘need not resign themselves to the cost and delay’ of side issues, barristers Daniel Lightman QC & Stephanie Thompson, of Serle Court, write in this week’s NLJ

In the lawsuit brought by the Duchess of Sussex against the Mail on Sunday for publishing a letter she wrote to her father, Mr Justice Warby agreed to strike out a number of allegations as they were not relevant to the Duchess’s case and would be likely to obstruct the just disposal of the proceedings.

A judge in a property dispute took a similarly ‘interventionist’ approach to case management, striking out several allegations.

Lightman & Thompson offer practical advice to litigators who may find themselves in a similar situation.

They conclude: ‘The court’s powers to exclude issues from consideration and limit evidence and cross-examination can have real teeth.’

Read the article in full here.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll