A man in a suit with a clipboard speaking to a female across the table with her hands held together on a table of documents. Court of Appeal affirms extended role of solicitors in assisting catastrophically injured clients

The court’s power to vary and revoke orders under CPR 3.1(7)—Solicitors Journal

Jack Rogers, Associate in the Russell-Cooke Solicitors, dispute resolution team.
Jack Rogers
1 min Read

Associate Jack Rogers has written an article in the Solicitors Journal examining the Court of Appeal’s decision in the case of UniCredit Bank GmbH v RusChemAlliance LLC. The piece explores the scope of CPR r.3.1(7), reaffirming the court’s discretionary power to vary or revoke orders, including final ones, where circumstances have materially changed. This judgment offers important clarity on the limited but significant flexibility courts retain to ensure fairness in litigation outcomes. 

The UniCredit case serves as a useful reminder of the possible recourse that litigants may have with respect to orders previously made by the court, which also reaffirms that it can adapt orders in response to evolving circumstances.
Jack Rogers, Associate in the Russell-Cooke Solicitors, dispute resolution team.
Jack Rogers • Associate
|

The full article is available in Solicitors Journal here.

Jack Rogers is an associate in the dispute resolution team. He advises on a wide range of commercial claims involving breach of contract, professional negligence, and construction disputes.

Get in touch

If you would like to speak with a member of the team you can contact our dispute resolution solicitors by telephone on +44 (0)20 3826 7513 or complete our enquiry form.

In the press Regulation and public law UniCredit Bank GmbH vs RusChemAlliance LLC CPR 3.1(7) Court of Appeal commercial disputes Jack Rogers Russell-Cooke Solicitors Journal