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?
The recent decision by Swift J in Biffa Waste Services Ltd v Ali Dinler & Ors displays that the court is taking a consistent approach when it comes to non-compliance with court orders.
In this appeal from the county court, the respondent filed his witness statements 27 days after the due date and two hours within the second deadline but were not received by the court until the day before trial. The district judge decided to grant the respondents relief from sanctions.
The Jackson reforms and the CPR r.3.9 places great weight on court time and resources when considering non-compliance with court orders.
Swift J held that the judge failed to identify the principles to be applied in granting relief from sanctions, and reinforced the view from recent decisions that it is a balancing exercise between proportionality and the overriding objective.
There is a significant change in light of the Jackson reforms which suggests this consistent approach to strict compliance will continue in the future.
In his 2018 Autumn Budget, the then Chancellor, Phillip Hammond, announced a significant change to the way liability for IR35 breaches will be dealt with for private sector companies from April 2020.
View blog
Under the ET Rules, all judgments and accompanying written reasons must be published on a pubic register which the general public can access online.
Last month, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) announced notice of its intention to fine (NOI) Marriott International, Inc. £99m for infringements of the GDPR.
On 16 July 2019 the Serious Fraud Office released details of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement reached with Sarclad Ltd in July 2016.
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up