Civil Procedure Rules are amended to provide for ‘buffer’ orders
You may recall that in our February edition of Accountability we highlighted the strict approach being taken by the courts when time limits and deadlines set by court orders, rules and practice directions were not met and when applications for relief from sanctions were being made as a result.
Parties have been understandably concerned about their ability to agree extensions of time with an opponent, where an automatic sanction applies to a failure to comply with the court order or rule in question…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co 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 Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Wragge Lawrence Graham & Co
The defence of illegality – which prevents a claimant from bringing a claim that arises out of its own illegal acts – can’t be used where the company is claiming against its directors.
Principle of the free movement of capital upheld in recent decision.