Home » News » Law reports » Law report details
Adjournment is dismissed by judge
Fitzroy Robinson Limited v Mentmore Towers Limited and others
(Queen’s Bench Division - Technology and Construction Court – 26 November 2009)
The defendants, Fitzroy Robinson, made an eleventh hour application to adjourn the trial on the basis that the parties’ failure to comply with the courts directions had made a fair trial difficult, if not impossible.
Particular emphasis was placed by the defendant on the fact that the parties’ experts had not had an opportunity to exchange reports, nor had they produced a joint statement.
In considering the application, Mr Justice Coulson referred to the overriding objective contained in Civil Procedure Rules 1998 Part 1.1, specifically the requirement that the parties be on an equal footing.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Coulson reflected on the parties’ conduct, reason for the delays, the extent to which the consequences of the delays can be overcome before the trial, whether a fair trial had been jeopardised by the delays, any specifics matters affecting the trial and any consequences of an adjournment for the parties or the court.
In refusing to adjourn the trial Mr Justice Coulson concluded that the application was not linked to concerns over the state of the witness evidence but was rather an attempt by the defendant to improve on its negotiating position in pressuring the claimant, Mentmore Towers Ltd, with the prospect of remaining without recompense for a further period.
Additionally, Mr Justice Coulson felt that a fair trial could go ahead within the timeframe set down in his earlier directions on the basis that both parties would remain on an equal footing as they had the same limited time to prepare for the trial.
CommentDirections are handed down to ensure that the parties are prepared for trial. It is right that a party should be precluded from seeking to manipulate the trial date and directions to put themselves in a stronger negotiating position. - David Scott, BLM Manchester
This law report first appeared in Post Magazine on 4 February 2010
|
Disclaimer: This document does not present a complete or comprehensive statement of the law, nor does it constitute legal advice. It is intended only to highlight issues that may be of interest to clients of Berrymans Lace Mawer LLP. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in any particular case.
For more information about any of our news releases, please contact:
Natalie King
t 020 7638 2811
f 020 7920 0361
e-mail:
natalie.king@blm-law.com  |