0370 270 6000

Dunnett v Railtrack Plc (in administration), Court of Appeal

11 March 2002
The issues

ADR

The facts

This case was reported in the Law Society Gazette.

In the course of proceedings both parties were told by the Court that they should attempt alternative dispute resolution. Railtrack refused to do so. The matter went to a substantive Hearing at which the Claimant’s Appeal was dismissed. The Court of Appeal refused to award costs to Railtrack however stating “parties and their lawyers should ensure that they are aware that it is one of their duties fully to consider ADR, especially when the Court has suggested it, and not merely to flatly turn it down. To flatly turn down ADR, could place the party doing so at risk of adverse consequences in costs”.

Focus on...

Press releases

Browne Jacobson wins Inclusion & Diversity Award at the National Insurance Awards 2022

Insurance law firm Browne Jacobson has won the Inclusion & Diversity Award at the National Insurance Awards 2022. The National Insurance Awards are judged by an independent panel of experts and celebrate excellence in the sector by highlighting the very best in general insurance provision and management.

View

Blogs

Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.

View

Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.

View

Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.

View

The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up