header-logo header-logo

Judicial line: 29 April 2020

29 April 2020
Issue: 7884 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Judicial line
printer mail-detail

Pockets to be emptied fast

Q CPR3.7A to 3.7AA deals with strike out for non-payment of a prescribed fee. They allow for reinstatement which is conditional on payment of the fee two days from the date of the court’s reinstatement order where the defaulting party was present or represented at the hearing. Does ‘two days from the date of the order’ mean two days from the hearing date, the date the order bears as typed by the court clerk, the date designated by the judge when formulating the order, the date the order was posted or the date the order was deemed served?

A It means two days from the date of the hearing, when the defaulting party was present or represented and so was aware of the outcome. The rule draws a distinction between that situation and the situation where there was no presence or representation. In the latter case, provision is made for time to run from the date of service of the reinstatement order.


Truth

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll