In the case of Garcia v Garcia, the claimant (Mr Garcia) and the defendant (Mrs Garcia) were ex-spouses who occupied separate parts of a house (the property), pursuant to an occupation order made by the Bromley Family Court.
REUTERS | Phil Noble
June 22, 2021
Garcia v Garcia: weighing in (live) on the truth
REUTERS | GCS
June 17, 2021
Non-party disclosure and confidentiality clubs: Bugsby Property LLC v LGIM Commercial Leasing Ltd and another
Non-party disclosure, and specifically the confidentiality concerns faced by non-party respondents, has been considered recently in the case of Bugsby Property LLC v LGIM Commercial Leasing Ltd and another. In that case, the parties to proceedings made applications for disclosure against five non-party respondents. The applications were made under CPR 31.17 and section 34 of the Senior Courts Act 1981. In partially granting the non-party disclosure application, Henshaw J ordered the disclosure to be subject to a tiered confidentiality club arrangement, limiting the classes of individuals who had access to different categories of disclosed documents.
REUTERS | Ints Kalnins
June 14, 2021
Costs deadlines: courts getting tougher
Historically courts took a relaxed attitude to deadlines, and it may seem strange to younger members of the profession, but in my working life parties could, and did, simply decide that they were not ready for trial and would tell the court to adjourn matters.
That all changed with the introduction of the Civil Procedure Rules and the very tough approach to relief from sanctions in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Limited, considerably softened by the subsequent decision in Denton and others v TH White Limited.
However, in relation to costs deadlines, with the marked exception of costs budgets, which the courts have an unhealthy obsession with, life has gone on as before with deadlines missed with no penalty.
There is evidence that the courts are now beginning to adopt a tougher line in relation to time limits and in relation to costs’ proceedings.
