Please sign in with your existing account details.
Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.
Privacy statement - Terms and conditions
Forgotten your password?
You have exceeded the maximum number of login attempts for this email address and your account has been locked. An email has been sent to member of Browne Jacobson's web team and some one will be contacting you over the next two working days with details of how to change your password.
Are you sure you want to remove this item from you pinned content?
In a judgment handed down today the Court of Appeal has taken the opportunity to broaden the principles in Halsey, in relation to awarding costs sanctions against a party who did not ‘beat’ a part 36 offer in court, on the basis of a refusal to mediate.
In the case of PGF II SA v OMFS Company 1 Limited, which centred on a dispute over three dilapidations claims, the judge was persuaded by the argument that not only was the defendant’s silence tantamount to a refusal to mediate, but that the silence itself was unreasonable. He went on to endorse the advice given in the recently published ADR Handbook encouraging parties to consider ADR before taking a case to trial.
This case is of importance to all who embark on litigation. It demonstrates a clear and unequivocal endorsement by the Court of Appeal as to the value of ADR, (including but not limited to mediation) and highlights the fact that a party who refuses to engage in the process of ADR can, and will, face costs sanctions.
The Government appears set to announce plans on ‘living with Covid to restore freedom’. With the success of the retail and hospitality sector key to recovery, what protections will be on offer to tenants to deal with Covid-19 rent arrears?
View blog
Break rights have proved a fertile source of litigation over the last few years. More often than not, tenants have found themselves on the wrong end of the decisions. However, a Court of Appeal decision yesterday has bucked that trend.
One of the requirements for tenants to contract out of the security of tenure regime contained in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is that they make a simple or statutory declaration before entering into the lease.
Landlords should reconsider summary judgment if a Part 26A restructuring plan is pending.
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up