Arkin v Marshall: the application of PD 51Z

Arkin v Marshall: the application of PD 51Z

Court of Appeal Case Considering Application of Practice Direction 51Z (Arkin v Marshall and Ors) Further to the series of Practice Notes considering the application of the new provisions in Landlord and Tenant Law, Rebecca Keeves now considers the implication of the...
Arkin v Marshall: the application of PD 51Z

Fixed Costs, Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting and Appeals

In January of this year the Court of Appeal grappled again with the vexed question of how to resolve the various, sometimes competing, costs regimes that now exist in the Civil Procedure Rules. Blair v. Wickes Building Supplies Ltd (No. 2) [2020] EWCA Civ 17...
Arkin v Marshall: the application of PD 51Z

4 Court of Appeal Cases that Criminal Practitioners Should Read

4 Court of Appeal Cases 29-30 April 2020 that Criminal Practitioners Should Read 2 of them involving the Vice-President of the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division),Fulford LJ; 2 of them with Burnett LCJ; 2 of them on 29th April, 2 on 30th April; 3 of them about...
Arkin v Marshall: the application of PD 51Z

Case Note: Re Amos

Case Comment – Re Amos – The Forfeiture Rule and Causing Death by Careless Driving In Re Amos [2020] EWHC 1063 (Ch) HHJ Jarman QC helpfully filled a lacuna in the authorities concerning the application of the forfeiture rule to cases of causing death by careless...
Arkin v Marshall: the application of PD 51Z

Case Note: Brian Lenord v First Manchester Limited

Case Note: Brian Lenord v First Manchester Limited [2020] EWHC 982 (QB) (24 April 2020) Introduction: The recent judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Brian Lenord v First Manchester Limited provides further clarification on the circumstances in which an appeal court can...