TITLE

Taylor Wessing secures cost cap for Associated

AUTHOR(S)
Harris, Joanne
PUB. DATE
April 2005
SOURCE
Lawyer;4/11/2005, Vol. 19 Issue 14, p5
SOURCE TYPE
Trade Publication
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The article reports that Taylor Wessing has won a landmark victory for libel defendants by securing a costs-capping order for Associated Newspapers Ltd. Charles Russell, for the claimant, said the case was subject to a conditional fee arrangement and that Matadeen had been unable to secure after-the event insurance. When this happens it is usual for the claimant solicitors to get a 100 percent success fee, raising potential total. Associated contended that the handicap imposed on the defendant in this situation is far greater than on the claimant.
ACCESSION #
16779234

 

Related Articles

  • Taylor Wessing makes libel history with Charles Russell cost capping. Moshinsky, Ben // Lawyer;3/12/2007, Vol. 21 Issue 10, p18 

    The article reports that Taylor Wessing has obtained the first cost-capping order against an opposing firm's fees in a libel dispute. As a result, Charles Russell's fees were slashed from £1 million to £445,000 plus VAT. Russell represented Alberta Matadeen in her claim against Associated...

  • THE COST OF LIBEL ACTIONS: A SCEPTICAL NOTE. HOWARTH, DAVID // Cambridge Law Journal;Jul2011, Vol. 70 Issue 2, p397 

    The article examines the cost of libel cases on both the claimants and defendants. According to the article, the British government attempted to put a cap to success fees in defamation and privacy cases covered by conditional fee agreements (CFA). Meanwhile, the Campaign for Libel Reform urges a...

  • Part 36 offers and CFA's.  // Communications Law: Journal of Computer, Media & Telecommunicati;2007, Vol. 12 Issue 4, p142 

    The article discusses the court case "Jones MP v. Associated Newspapers Ltd." It states that the trial of this libel action happened from June 11 to 14, 2007. After five hours deliberation, the jury returned a majority verdict in the claimant's favor and awarded 5,000 pounds by way of damages....

  • Defamation: time limits reduced.  // Accountancy;Mar1986, Vol. 97 Issue 1111, p30 

    Reports that the 57th section of the Administration of Justice Act of 1985 in Great Britain changes the time limits for actions for libel and slander. Reduction from six to three years from publication.

  • ONLY IN AMERICA (Cont'd).  // Fortune;12/27/1993, Vol. 128 Issue 16, p141 

    An excerpt from an article published in the "Wall Street Journal" is presented.

  • Owner Not Liable for Defamation Against Former Resident.  // Apartment Building Management Insider;2009, Vol. 23 Issue 13, p5 

    The article discusses a court case wherein a former resident sued the owner and property manager of the apartment that he formerly rented for defamation.

  • Judge throws out suit against editor.  // Advocate;7/8/70, Vol. 4 Issue 10, p22 

    Reports on the dismissal of a complaint of criminal defamation filed by a police official against the editor of the periodical 'Mattachine Midwest,' in Chicago, Illinois. Reason for filing the complaint; Grounds on which the case was dismissed.

  • Takeover panel 'privileged'. Kobrin, David // Accountancy;Feb1981, Vol. 92 Issue 1050, p96 

    Discusses a High Court in Great Britain's ruling on the libel case of Graff v Panel on Takeovers and Mergers. Case background; Upholding of the Takeover Panel's defense of qualified privilege.

  • NO NAME IS NO DEFENCE. Chandler, Ainslie // BRW;3/11/2010, Vol. 32 Issue 9, p55 

    The article discusses a court case wherein defamation actions were filed against three contributors of the HotCopper investment website by DataMotion Asia Pacific after comments made about the firm's managing director Ronald Moir in Australia.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics