Tag Archives: Bronia Hartley

COSTS BUDGETS: PHASES CAN’T BE COMBINED WHERE THERE IS AN OVERSPEND IN ONE BUT AN UNDERSPEND IN ANOTHER

By Bronia Hartley Sony Communications International AB (Claimant) v SSH Communications Security Corp (Defendant): SSH Communications Security Corp (Part 20 Claimant) v (1) Sony Mobile Communications AB (2) Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd (3) Sony Europe Limited (4) Sony Network Entertainment Europe Ltd (Part 20 Defendants) [2016] EWHC 2985 (Pat)  HEADLINE: Each phase of the […]

UNLESS ORDERS & RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

By Bronia Hartley Philip John Eaglesham v Ministry of Defence [2016] EWHC 3011 (QB) Headline: ‘A party who faces genuine difficulties in complying with a court Order, particularly an Unless Order, should come back to the Court and explain the problems that it is facing as soon as they arise, if those problems are sufficiently […]

OCCUPIERS’ LIABILITY ILLUSTRATED: Christopher Edwards v London Borough of Sutton [2016] EWCA Civ 1005

 By Bronia Hartley In this recent and interesting case, Lord Justice McCombe’s judgement represents a comprehensive reminder of how the duty on occupiers imposed by the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 should be approached. INTRODUCTION The defendant, the London Borough of Sutton (“Sutton”), brought an appeal against the decision of Judge Gore QC (sitting as a Judge […]

MONTHLY ROUND UP: JUNE 2015

There have been some interesting cases this month involving Litigants in Person and relief from sanctions applications discussed on the blog this month. Here’s what else we have been talking about: LIABILITY Justin Crossley considered the test of “reasonable foreseeability” in Lowdon-v-Jump Zone Leisure UK Limited [2015] EWCA Civ586 All The Fun Of The Fair  Gordon Exall considered […]

APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME TO SERVE A RESPONDENT’S NOTICE – MITCHELL PRINCIPLES APPLY

 By Bronia Hartley Altomart Ltd v Salford Estates (No.2) Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1408 Under CPR r.52.5(4) and (5), a respondent who is seeking permission to appeal from the appeal court or wishes to ask the appeal court to uphold the order of the lower court for reasons different from or additional to those given […]

GROSS CARELESSNESS BY YOUR EMPLOYEE – IT’S STILL ON YOU

 By Bronia Hartley The creation of a material risk by the carelessness of an employee remained a material risk for the purpose of the offence of failing so far as reasonably practicable to ensure the health and safety of employees contrary to the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 s.33(1)(a) Polyflor Ltd v. […]

BITE SIZE RTA CASE LAW UPDATE (JULY)

  By Bronia Hartley   Road traffic accidents are notoriously fact specific, but looking at those cases which go to trial can be helpful in terms of understanding what judges think is important. Here I look at three very different recent cases.  In Jade Christian v. South East London & Kent Bus Co. the court […]