Richardson v Glencore UK Ltd & Ors
2014
COMMERCIAL COURT
United Kingdom
CORAM
- MR JUSTICE WALKER
Areas of Law
- Employment Law
- Civil Procedure
2014
COMMERCIAL COURT
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involved the employment rights of a senior commodities trader and complex trust arrangements. The court criticized the parties for their late and inappropriate request to vacate the case management conference and emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural rules and holding oral hearings for complex cases. Despite procedural violations, no severe sanctions were applied in this instance.
JUDGMENT
Friday, 7 th November 2014 .
JUDGMENT:
MR JUSTICE WALKER:
Today I have heard the first case management conference in this action. It is a case which concerns the employment rights of a senior trader who was employed in the trading of commodities. His employment entitled him to certain benefits. Among those benefits were trust arrangements in respect of which the third defendant was trustee. Those trust arrangements are not straightforward. As regards the detail and true effect of those arrangements, as with other aspects of the case, much is in dispute. Indeed the parties have not even been able to agree as to whether the employer was the first or fourth defendant.
Yesterday afternoon a letter, said to have been written on behalf of all of the parties, was emailed to the court listing officer. It was short and to the point. The letter informed the court that agreement had been reached by the parties on the list of issues, on the case memorandum, and on a draft order as to the pre-trial timetable, all of which were enclosed. It then concluded:
In light of the agreement reached between the parties as to directions for disposal of the case, we would be grateful if the court could please confirm whether our attendance tomorrow will be required.
Letters which are short and to the point are often desirable. However this letter demonstrated a failure on the part of all concerned to appreciate the role and importance of the case management conference. It also demonstrated a failure to comply with the special provision made for case management in the Commercial Court by CPR 58.13 , Practice Direction 58, and the Admiralty and Commercial Court Guide (“the Guide”).
That special provision is described in detail in section D of the Guide. Within section D, section D8.3 stresses that the case management conference is a very significant stage in the case. Directions appropriate for a case management conference will not normally be made by consent without the need for attendance. The general rule is that there must be an oral case management conference at court. Paragraph (f) of section D8.3 adds that it is unlikely that any case involving expert evidence or preliminary issues will be suitable for a case management conference on paper. In cases involving expert evidence the court is anxious to give particular scrutiny to that evidence, given the cost such evidence usually involves and the need to focus that evidence. In cases where preliminary issues are