We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 287

Email acceptance of offer
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • March 26 2010

There is no authority to say whether an email acceptance is effective when it arrives or at the time when the offeror could reasonably have been expected to read it


XVW & YZA v Gravesend Grammar School for Girls
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • April 25 2012

Neither a school nor a specialist expedition company were vicariously liable for the acts of a man who raped three girls on a school expedition in Belize, while they were working and staying on his farm


A round-up of some recent cases March 2014
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • March 31 2014

The issue of a claim form, and not the service of it, begins proceedings and gives the court jurisdiction to order costs of and incidental to those


Jurisdiction clauses
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • January 30 2010

This case concerns a series of complex agreements relating to equities and foreign exchange trading concluded between the claimant, an investment bank domiciled in Germany, and the defendant company incorporated in the Turks and Caicos Islands


Renwick v Simon and Michael Brooke Architects latent damage in construction claims
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • June 22 2011

The claimant homeowners must have had the knowledge required under s14A of the Limitation Act 1980 for bringing an action against the second defendant, William Attwell and Associates (Attwell), more than three years before they began proceedings against the firm


When is a Part 36 offer not a Part 36 offer?
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • May 25 2012

PHI Group Limited v Robert West Consulting Limited clarifies the costs consequences of offers which fall outside the Part 36 costs regime


With or without prejudice?
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • October 28 2014

What lawyers write - or don't write - at the top of letters and emails can adversely affect their clients or employers. The temptation to put


Costs consequences of pre-action Part 36 offers Solomon v Cromwell Group plc CPR 36.10 and CPR 45
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • January 30 2012

The Court of Appeal has confirmed that where a defendant’s Part 36 offer is made and accepted before proceedings are begun, the claimant is entitled to claim costs under CPR 36.10


Recovery of success fees
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • March 3 2011

The defendant appealed successfully against a detailed assessment of costs in a clinical negligence infant claim arising out of a premature birth caused by a road traffic accident


Time bars and estoppel
  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • November 28 2011

Although there is no general duty owed by one party to litigation to correct the mistakes of the other, there are circumstances in which deliberately allowing the other party to continue in a mistaken belief will be unconscionable