Failure to comply with CPR rules and Practise directions

[Cpt Morgan]

Hi, In a recent case I was involved with, the defendants barrister failed to comply with CPR rules and Practise directions, considered as serious by the judge. The judge asked the barrister if he considered the breach to be serious and he said 'no', so the judge asked him again and he repeated his answer 'no', so the judge requested that he apply for relief from sanctions.

What is the likely outcome as I can't seem to see anything online that shows the 'punishment' is the relief from sanctions isn't granted.

By the wording of the judge, he stated there were no excuses for a 'layman' to not understand the law, as the supreme court had rules as such in another case, and therefore the rules had to be applied, and that claiming to simply not understand the law was no excuse for not following CPR and Practise directions.

What is the likely outcome and how do I find out what those sanctions will be and how they will be applied?

[atticus]

OK...

I suspect that this was not about the barrister as such, and that the barrister was involved as advocate.

When courts speak of "relief from sanctions" they are dealing with a case where the rules or a court order specify that something is to be done by a stated time, with adverse consequences if that thing is not done. The thing has not been done. The party who failed to do it is asking the court to allow the thing to be done and to disapply the specified consequence.

If the application for relief from sanctions is not successful, then the sanction (i.e. specified consequence for not doing the thing) stands.

To read more, find the Civil Litigation Brief blog and search for posts on relief from sanctions.