How many times has [2019] EWHC 1386 (Ch) been cited?

[2019] EWHC 1386 (Ch) is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[2019] EWHC 1386 (Ch)

· cited by 2 · influence score 13/100

Is it still good law? No negative treatment found in this dataset — it has been cited without being doubted or overruled here.

How to cite

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Considered · 1Followed · 1

Followed — Lejonvarn v Burgess & Anor 2020-02-06
“…I agree that the changes to the CPR in respect of proportionality are important. Their effect has been neatly summarised by Marcus Smith J in Bohinc v Malmsten [2019] EWHC 1386 (Ch) as follows:…”
Considered — West v Stockport NHS Foundation Trust 2019-07-17
“…Malmsten v Bohinc [2019] EWHC 1386 (Ch), Marcus Smith J, sitting with Master Rowley, left out of account both VAT and the costs of drawing the bill when considering the question of proportionality. T…”