RECORDING COURT PROCEEDING WITHOUT PERMISSION: THE PROBLEM ARISES – AGAIN
In Business Mortgage Finance 4 Plc & Ors v Hussain & Ors [2021] EWHC 2766 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles gave a judgment in another case where a party had recorded proceedings without permission. Permission was given retrospectively, however this was…
COSTS OF ASSESSMENT CAN BE REDUCED BECAUSE BILL WAS REDUCED: NO NEED FOR MISCONDUCT OR SKULDUGGERY
In Milbrooke Construction Ltd v Jones [2021] EWHC B20 (Costs) Costs Judge Brown found that the reduction of a bill of costs by a major percentage can be grounds, in itself, for disallowing part of the receiving party’s costs of…
WASTED COSTS AND THE SOLICITOR AS TARGET: “HEAVY SATELLITE LITIGATION IS TO BE DEPRECATED”
The judgment of Mr Justice Bryan in Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su & Ors [2021] EWHC 2702 (Comm) is essential reading for anyone contemplating making a wasted costs application. It is, of course, equally important for anyone defending such…
DRAFT JUDGMENTS AND THE USE OF EMAIL EXPLODERS: MORE CAUTION IS NEEDED
One particular aspect of the judgment in Optis Cellular Technology Inc & Anor v Apple Retail UK Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2694 (Pat)that requires highlighting is the judge’s consideration of the use of “e-mail exploders” used by the parties when…
NO MATTER HOW BIG YOU ARE, OR HOW IMPORTANT (YOU THINK) YOU ARE – YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES: SECRETARY OF STATE REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE
In Good Law Project Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2021] EWHC 2595 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser issued a clear and stark warning that expert evidence has to comply with the…
LITIGATION, DELAY AND THE DOCTRINE OF LACHES: IT WOULD BE “UNCONSCIONABLE FOR THE COURT TO GRANT THE APPLICANT ANY RELIEF”
The judgment of ICC Judge Barber in CSB 123 Ltd, Re [2021] EWHC 2506 (Ch)is interesting for a large number of reasons. Not least the total failure of the applicant to establish major (if not all) parts of its case,…
RUDE CORRESPONDENCE: A RECAP: JUST REMEMBER WHAT YOU WRITE COULD END UP ON A BLOG SOME DAY (FOR THE WHOLE WORLD TO SEE…)
Several search terms that led people to this blog today related to the “arrogant tone of solicitor correspondence”. This seems like a good time to recap on Guidance and case law where, shall we say “assertive” correspondence has been considered…
JUDGE ENTITLED TO FIND A CLAIMANT WAS NOT DISHONEST: IT MAY BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO DIRECT ATTENTION TO SOLICITOR RATHER THAN THE “HAPLESS CLIENT”
In Michael v I E & D Hurford Ltd (t/a Rainbow) [2021] EWHC 2318 (QB) Mrs Justice Stacey refused the defendant’s appeal in a case where the trial judge had found the claimant not to be fundamentally dishonest. The claimant…
“THERE IS A WORRYING TREND… IN TERMS OF FAILURE BY EXPERTS GENERALLY IN LITIGATION COMPLYING WITH THEIR DUTIES”
There is an important point about a litigant’s responsibility for the conduct of their own experts (and expert’s conduct generally) in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd (No. 2 Costs) [2021] EWHC 1414 (TCC). This was…
CLAIMANTS RECOVER NO COSTS AT ALL WHEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS WERE “DIRECTLY UNTRUE”: ALSO LIABLE FOR INDEMNITY COSTS FOR A PERIOD
This blog has looked twice at the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd [2021] EWHC 1116 (TCC). There is now a sequel. In Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting…
LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT”
Over the years we have seen some biting judgments about the conduct of experts in civil litigation. I struggle to recall one as extraordinary as the judgment of Mrs Justice Joanna Smith in Dana UK AXLE Ltd v Freudenberg FST…
PROVING THINGS 211: PROVING DAMAGES AND CAUSATION: CLAIM £3 MILLION GET £2,000: “A WEAK AND SPECULATIVE CLAIM”
We have already looked once at the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd [2021] EWHC 1116 (TCC). However given that the claimants were seeking in excess of £3 million and…
A LOT ABOUT LITIGATION CONDUCT HERE: SIGNATURE OF THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: POOR BUNDLES: POOR WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE TOTAL LACK OF WISDOM IN SENDING MATERIAL DIRECTLY TO THE JUDGE IN THE MIDDLE OF A TRIAL…
The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd [2021] EWHC 1116 (TCC) demonstrate some “unusual” conduct in litigation. Not least the claimant’s solicitors wrote to the judge, in the middle of…
CAN THE COURT MAKE A COSTS ORDER AFTER A THE FIRST PART OF A SPLIT TRIAL? THE RELEVANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER
In Original Beauty Technology Company Ltd & Ors v G4k Fashion Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 954 (Ch) David Stone (sitting as a High Court judge) considered the question of whether the court should make a costs order after a…
CASES WHERE JUDGES GOT TO READ THINGS THAT LAWYERS WISH THEY HAD NEVER WRITTEN
The earlier post about judges reading information about lawyers online has given rise to a lot of comments and commentary. There are occasions when judges, as part of their job, get to read things that lawyers wish they had never…
BUNDLES AGAIN: JUDGES WASTING THEIR BREATH: “HOW MANY YEARS – DECADES – HAVE TO PASS BEFORE THOSE WHO KNOW BETTER AND WHO… ARE BEING HANDSOMELY REMUNERATED COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS?”
Another post that adds to the dozens, if not hundreds, of cases about bundles. The trial bundles were the subject of considerable criticism by Sir James Munby in C (A Child) [2021] EWFC 32. “I forebear from further judicial exhortation…
“THERE ARE NOT TWO SETS OF RULES FOR LITIGATION IN THIS JURISDICTION”: COURT AWARDS INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST A LITIGANT IN PERSON
In Sir Henry Royce Memorial Foundation v Hardy [2021] EWHC 817 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court judge) awarded indemnity costs against a litigant in person. “There are not two sets of rules for litigation in this…
COSTS, CONDUCT AND ASSESSMENT ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: £2 MILLION SPENT TO RECOVER £40,666.47
An earlier post looked at the construction of the Part 36 offer in Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 653 (Ch) Andrew Lenon Q.C. (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division). Here we look at…
“THIS APPLICATION WAS A SIGNIFICANT ABUSE OF THE PROCEDURES … AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE”: THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT, DUTIES TO THE COURT AND THE HAMID JURISDICTION
In the judgment today in DVP & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 606 (Admin) the Administrative Court exercised considered a case referred to it under the “Hamid” jurisdiction…
LAWYERS (AND ALL LITIGANTS) REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT WRITE TO THE COURT WITHOUT COPYING IN THE PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION
For the second time in two days I am writing of a case where a party has written to the court unilaterally, without copying in the other parties. It was a matter raised in the judgment of Mr Justice Fordham…