Civil Procedure in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Johnson v Gore Wood & Company (A Firm)
    • House of Lords
    • 14 Diciembre 2000

    That is to adopt too dogmatic an approach to what should in my opinion be a broad, merits-based judgment which takes account of the public and private interests involved and also takes account of all the facts of the case, focusing attention on the crucial question whether, in all the circumstances, a party is misusing or abusing the process of the court by seeking to raise before it the issue which could have been raised before.

  • Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 27 Noviembre 2013

    If the non-compliance cannot be characterised as trivial, then the burden is on the defaulting party to persuade the court to grant relief. If there is a good reason for it, the court will be likely to decide that relief should be granted.

  • E D & F Man Liquid Products Ltd v Patel and Another
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 04 Abril 2003

    In some cases it may be clear that there is no real substance in factual assertions made, particularly if contradicted by contemporary documents.

  • Connelly v DPP
    • House of Lords
    • 21 Abril 1964

    There can be no doubt that a court which is endowed with a particular jurisdiction has powers which are necessary to enable it to act effectively within such jurisdiction. I would regard them as powers which are inherent in its jurisdiction. A court must enjoy such powers in order to enforce its rules of practice and to suppress any abuses of its process and to defeat any attempted thwarting of its process.

  • Ventouris v Mountain
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 08 Febrero 1991

    The courts must not in any way encroach on the right of a litigant or potential litigant to seek and obtain legal advice on his prospects and the conduct of proceedings under the seal of confidence nor on the right of such a litigant and his legal adviser to prepare for and conduct his case without, directly or indirectly, revealing the effect of that advice.

  • Masterman-Lister v Brutton; Masterman-Lister v Jewell
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 16 Enero 2003

    For the purposes of RSC 80 – and, now, CPR 21—the test to be applied, as it seems to me, is whether the party to legal proceedings is capable of understanding, with the assistance of such proper explanation from legal advisers and experts in other disciplines as the case may require, the issues on which his consent or decision is likely to be necessary in the course of those proceedings.

  • Siskina (Owners of cargo lately laden on board) v Distos Compania Naviera S.A.
    • House of Lords
    • 26 Octubre 1977

    A right to obtain an interlocutory injunction is not a cause of action. It is dependent upon there being a pre-existing cause of action against the defendant arising out of an invasion, actual or theatened by him, of a legal or equitable right of the plaintiff for the enforcement of which the defendant is amenable to the jurisdiction of the court. The right to obtain an interlocutory injunction is merely ancillary and incidental to the pre-existing cause of action.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT