Little v Bloomsbury Law Solicitors

Alexander represented the claimant on applications to set aside an unless order, reinstate an appeal and obtain relief from sanctions after an appeal bundle had not been filed by the court-imposed deadline.

Case overview

An unless order made on the court's own initiative required an appeal bundle to be filed by a specified date. It was uploaded to CE-File but was not served. The court considered whether the absence of service affected the deadline and whether the appeal should be reinstated after a lengthy failure to inspect the electronic court file.

Principal issues or remedies

• Construction and effect of an unless order which did not provide for service.
• The jurisdiction to set aside an order made without a hearing under CPR 3.3(5) and CPR 3.1(7).
• The Denton test for relief from sanctions and responsibility for monitoring CE-File.

Alexander's role, work and outcome

Alexander addressed the proper construction of an order made without a hearing, the relationship between service and compliance, the court's powers under CPR 3.3(5) and CPR 3.1(7), Article 6 and the Denton framework. The High Court refused to set aside the unless order, reinstate the appeal or grant relief from sanctions.

Why the case matters

The report is a practical warning about compliance with unless orders and the expectation that solicitors monitor CE-File even where an order has not separately been served.

Official, reported and published materials

Reported at [2022] 11 WLUK 351. The report is available through subscription legal databases.