Commercial update: Validating service – no special rules for litigants in person
8th March 2018
What provides good reason for validating irregular service of a claim form?
Hugh-Guy Lorriman analyses the Supreme Court’s most recent contribution to the issue (Barton v. Wright Hassall LLP [2018] UKSC 12). Read the full briefing here
Hugh-Guy is a pupil barrister with an interest in Commercial Law.
Related News
-
3PB Barristers (3 Paper Buildings) is delighted to announce that property, commercial and chancery barrister Thomas Talbot-Ponsonby will officially be appointed as a District Judge from Monday 6 January 2025. District Judge Talbot-Ponsonby will sit on the South Eastern Circuit and be based at the Slough Law Courts. Thomas was called to the Bar in 2011 and was appointed as a Deputy District Judge and a fee-paid Employment Judge in 2021. Before coming to the...
Continue reading -
3PB's commercial litigation barrister Makhsudul Islam (pictured here) acted for the defendant who was pursued by his former solicitors for recovery of its unpaid legal fees, following an alleged breach of contract. The High Court in Birmingham has now confirmed in GT Stewart Limited v Mr Paul Oliver Taylor that a claimant who settled a claim in its favour was not automatically entitled to its costs by virtue of CPR 44.2(2)(a). Further to a dispute...
Continue reading -
3PB’s commercial and property barrister Alex Whatley will be speaking at the Civil Litigation Conference on the Thursday 27th March for the Bournemouth Law Society. The conference is taking place at The Carlton Hotel in Bournemouth. To book your ticket for this event, please click here. The cost is £100 for members and £150 for non-members. Alex Whatley is recommended in both Chambers and Partners UK and Legal 500 as a top commercial litigation barrister....
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers’ (3 Paper Buildings) specialist commercial, chancery and property barrister Alexander Whatley has written for LexisNexis on the case of R v Revenue and Customs Commissioners, which was brought to the Supreme Court to determine the correct characterisation of a contract. In his article, entitled “Amendments in retrospect – Repair or replace? (R v Revenue and Customs Commissioners)”, Alexander explores the legal distinctions between amendment, rescission and replacement, the relevant contextual considerations for the courts and...
Continue reading
