New guidance on applications for relief from sanctions
By Clark Sargent
The Court of Appeal has given further guidance, in the conjoined appeals in Denton v TH White Ltd and other cases, on how relief from sanctions applications under CPR 3.9 should be dealt with following that previously given in the Mitchell decision.
The Court of Appeal, consisting of the Master of Rolls, Vos LJ and Jackson LJ, held that an application for relief should be addressed in three stages. Judges should: identify and assess the seriousness and significance of the ‘failure to comply with any rule, practice direction or court order’ that engages CPR 3.9(1); consider why the default occurred; and evaluate ‘all the circumstances of the case to enable the court to deal justly with the application including the need (a) for litigation to be conducted efficiently and at proportionate cost (CPR 3.9[a]) and (b) to enforce compliance with rules, practice directions and orders (CPR 3.9[b])’…
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 most likely option is the use of EC-approved Model Contracts
Court finds EC’s decisions to grant marketing authorisations for two generic products were consistent with legal provision.