header-logo header-logo

Harrison v Harrison [2009] All ER (D) 61 (Feb)

19 February 2009
Issue: 7357 / Categories: Case law , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

Legal Profession

Wasted costs orders (under s 51(6) of the Supreme Court Act 1981) are remedies of last resort. The legal representative  should not be called on to reply unless an apparently strong prima facie case has been made against him. Where the responding lawyer is required to show cause why an order should not be made, the burden of proof does not shift away from the applicant, who must establish his case. Even where the court is satisfied as to conduct and causation, it has to consider whether to exercise the discretion to make the order and to what extent. Orders should only be made under s 51(6) where, and to the extent that, the conduct so characterised has been established as directly causative of wasted costs. Applications for wasted costs are usually best left until after the end of the trial.

Issue: 7357 / Categories: Case law , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
Transferring anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing supervision to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) could create extra paperwork and increase costs for clients, lawyers have warned 
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
As he steps down as Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Julian Flaux reflects on over 40 years in law, citing independence, impartiality and integrity as guiding principles. In a special interview with Grania Langdon-Down for NLJ, Sir Julian highlights morale, mentorship and openness as key to a thriving judiciary
Dinsdale v Fowell is a High Court case entangling bigamy, intestacy and modern family structures, examined in this week's NLJ by Shivi Rajput of Stowe Family Law
back-to-top-scroll