In CXZ v ZXC, Steyn J analysed the claimant’s pleaded case, in this instance as to whether the law had been set in motion against him on a criminal charge. She then examined the four elements of the tort of malicious prosecution, and the fact that a claimant has to prove each element.
Costs professionals regularly receive questions about certain aspects of inter partes assessments, such as the amount of recoverable interest and myriad issues surrounding costs budgeting. Most will have ready answers. However, there remain areas where even the most experienced of those in our field require clarification.
Master Gordon-Saker’s judgment in Marbrow v Sharpes Garden Services Ltd is one such case that shows how budgeting and interest still invite confusion.
The decision in Stanley v London Borough of Tower Hamlets arose out of circumstances at a very specific point in time that may not be exactly replicated. The claimant attempted to effect service on the defendant just two days after the national lockdown was announced. Businesses across the country had to adapt to an unprecedented situation but had not yet necessarily set up appropriate systems to deal with remote working. Continue reading