Can you pay your litigation bills? You might be required to show proof...
In a group action for damages for defects in breast implants, the claimants were concerned about the financial position of the lead defendant (Transform). They wanted to see Transform’s liability insurance to find out if it could finance its way through the litigation and, ultimately, pay damages and costs. To obtain this information, they applied to the court for further information and clarification using CPR 18 and CPR 3.1 (2) (m).
On the evidence, the judge found that Transform might not be able to fund the litigation — or pay damages or costs. Were Transform to become insolvent during the proceedings, the court would have to make substantial adjustments to the running of the group action, including the establishment of new sample cases, a review of the case management directions and, possibly, a new trial date. By not providing the insurance details, Transform was therefore risking wasted costs and court time at the public’s expense.
The key issue was whether the court could use CPR 18 or CPR 3.1(2)(m) to order disclosure of the insurance details…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Walker Morris briefing.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Walker Morris
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Walker Morris
Landlords must protect tenants’ deposits and provide tenants with prescribed information, regardless of when the tenancy commenced and when the deposit was received.
In the Yam Seng case, the court was willing to imply a duty of good faith to give business efficacy to a commercial contract. Since that case, the law has been somewhat uncertain.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Which firms are cutting it in this era of slimline rosters, and who are the GC new brooms making clean sweeps? The Lawyer can reveal all
The law school war shows no signs of ending. But we have, perhaps, reached the end of the beginning.