Jump to content

Shays Given Tim Flowers

Member
  • Content Count

    13,404
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Shays Given Tim Flowers

  1. Come to the UK, it's not Mother's day here.
  2. It gets a bit more complicated than that. But yes, if you can hide something nobody knows about then chances are they never will. Of course the lawyers involved are guilty of gross misconduct if they don’t disclose material they are aware of...
  3. UK courts are some of the worlds best for this type of thing.
  4. So the sanction of non-disclosure is that the party who doesn’t disclose can’t use the document. But it appears that if a party chooses not to disclose the trial Judge can draw inferences from that failure. So if I say I need to see something and you refuse to provide it then;absent of any compelling reason, the trial judge may well think I have something to hide.
  5. I think (emphasis added) that the sanction is that the party who doesn’t disclose a document cannot rely on the document themselves. That’s what the civil procedure rules say. Think there are also potentially costs implications (meaning at the end of the case it can be relevant as to who pays what costs regardless of who wins the case).
  6. So the sanction for non-disclosure is that the defaulting party cannot rely upon the document themselves. So the PL may well refuse to disclose documents.
  7. You need more evidence the more serious/consequential the allegation, but technically the burden remains the same. So pretty much
  8. The burden of proof is that they have to show it is more likely than not that the PL broke anti-competition law.
  9. The maggies Got to love him though.
  10. just been massively triggered by the BBC article on all of this.
×
×
  • Create New...