Pre-action correspondence and costs following discontinuance: a practical view from the Bar | Practical Law

Pre-action correspondence and costs following discontinuance: a practical view from the Bar | Practical Law

In his monthly column, James Bickford Smith considers the Court of Appeal's decision in Nelson's Yard Management Company and others v Eziefula [2013] EWCA Civ 235 and how a failure to respond to pre-action correspondence can justify departure from the default rules on costs following discontinuance.

Pre-action correspondence and costs following discontinuance: a practical view from the Bar

by James Bickford Smith, Littleton Chambers
Published on 03 Apr 2013 • England, Wales
In his monthly column, James Bickford Smith considers the Court of Appeal's decision in Nelson's Yard Management Company and others v Eziefula [2013] EWCA Civ 235 and how a failure to respond to pre-action correspondence can justify departure from the default rules on costs following discontinuance.
James is a barrister at Littleton Chambers specialising in commercial and employment law.