header-logo header-logo

15 November 2013
Issue: 7584 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Practice

Gulati and others v MGN Ltd [2013] EWHC 3392 (Ch), [2013] All ER (D) 66 (Nov)

There were a number of established principles in respect of applications for summary judgment. The usual way of trying disputes was to have a trial after the normal processes of disclosure and interrogatories had been gone through, though there were exceptions to that. One such exemption was that summary judgment might be given against a claimant if it was clear beyond question that the statement of facts was contradicted by all the documents or other material on which it was based. The simpler the case, the easier it would be to take that view. However, more complex cases were unlikely to be capable of being resolved in that way without conducting a mini-trial on the documents, without discovery and without oral evidence. That was not the object of CPR 24. It was designed to deal with cases that were not fit for trial at all. So there should not be mini-trial. Judgment might be given against the claim if it had no real prospect of succeeding. The question was whether there was a

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

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