Civil Procedure in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Swain v Hillman
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 21 Oct 1999

    It is important that a judge in appropriate cases should make use of the powers contained in Part 24. In doing so he or she gives effect to the overriding objectives contained in Part 1. It saves expense; it achieves expedition; it avoids the court's resources being used up on cases where this serves no purpose, and I would add, generally, that it is in the interests of justice.

  • Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 27 Nov 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 Abr 2003

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

  • Ventouris v Mountain
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 08 Feb 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.

  • Connelly v DPP
    • House of Lords
    • 21 Abr 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.

  • English v Emery Reimbold & Strick Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 30 Abr 2002

    It follows that, if the appellate process is to work satisfactorily, the judgment must enable the appellate court to understand why the Judge reached his decision. This does not mean that every factor which weighed with the Judge in his appraisal of the evidence has to be identified and explained. But the issues the resolution of which were vital to the Judge's conclusion should be identified and the manner in which he resolved them explained.

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

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