Gregor Woods

Oct 22, 2024 | cms.law | Gregor Woods

Navigating Wasted Costs Orders: Insights from Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd22/10/2024When might it be appropriate to fix the solicitors of a fundamentally dishonest Claimant with an obligation to pay the Defendant’s costs?We previously reported on the striking case of Kirsty Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC... Read moreAuthors Gregor WoodsPartnerSheffieldLayla ToddProfessional Support LawyerBristol

Apr 15, 2024 | lexology.com | Gregor Woods

In Kirsty Williams- Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC 806 (KB), a claimant who had sustained serious injuries following her fall from a pier in 2018 had her claim dismissed because the judge, applying s.57 of the Criminal Justice & Courts Act 2015, concluded that she had been fundamentally dishonest and that dismissing her claim would not cause “substantial injustice”.

Apr 15, 2024 | cms.law | Gregor Woods

Fundamentally dishonest claimant’s claim dismissed: s.57 of the Criminal Justice & Courts Act 2015 in action15/04/2024In Kirsty Williams- Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC 806 (KB), a claimant who had sustained serious injuries following her fall from a pier in 2018 had her claim dismissed because the judge, applying s.57 of the Criminal Justice & Courts... Read moreAuthors Gregor WoodsPartnerSheffield

Mar 13, 2024 | insuranceday.com | Gregor Woods

Analysis UK Court of Appeal has attempted to bring clarity to the notoriously slippery legal concept of material contribution Already a subscriber? Sign in to continue reading. If content does not display, please refresh your browser. New to Insurance Day? Buy a subscription for unlimited access to news, interviews, analysis and much more.

Dec 1, 2023 | lexology.com | Gregor Woods

In a much-anticipated judgment, the Court of Appeal has returned to the question of mandatory non-court-based dispute resolution (or ADR, as most people still call it), which was previously considered by the Court of Appeal 20 years ago in Halsey[1]. Two principal questions were considered: does the Court have the power to order the parties in Court proceedings to engage in some form of ADR? If so, in what circumstances?