Search Mobile

collapse

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

Email address

Password

need to register?

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?

collapseSign

Home

Insights

Resources

Blogs

Courts start to enforce Mitchell decision

courts start to enforce Mitchell decision

18 December 2013

Decisions relating to the compliance with directions are like buses; you wait ages for one and then they all come at once.

We waited until the end of November for the Court of Appeal’s decision in Mitchell; however decisions demonstrating the court’s strict approach following the Jackson reforms are now coming in thick and fast, with two decisions published today.

In Adlington & 133 Ors v Els International the judge held the failure of 7 of the 134 claimants to sign a statement of truth, due to holiday commitments, could not be categorised as “trivial” as defined in Mitchell. Accordingly he would not grant those claimants relief from sanctions.

In Durrant v Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset the Court of Appeal held, that while it will not interfere with case management decisions lightly, the robust approach set out in Mitchell must not be undermined by lower courts’ decision.

The message from the courts is clear: relief from sanctions will rarely be granted where a party fails to comply with directions.

related opinions

Court of Appeal confirms all employment tribunal judgments must be published on the register, except in national security cases

Under the ET Rules, all judgments and accompanying written reasons must be published on a pubic register which the general public can access online.

View blog

Marriott International: a look behind the ICO’s £99m fine and what this means for corporate acquisitions

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.

View blog

Supreme Court backs employers seeking to enforce restrictive covenants: Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd

The Supreme Court in Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd has determined that where post-termination restrictive covenants (i.e. “non-compete” clauses) in employment contracts go further than reasonably necessary to protect an employer’s business interests, it can apply the ‘blue pencil test,’ severing the offending words and leaving the remaining enforceable clause in place.

View blog