CASES MUST BE DECIDED ON EVIDENCE RATHER THAN PREJUDICE: JUDGE TELLING COUNSEL TO “GET A LIFE” MAY INDICATE PREJUDGMENT
In Vassilliou -v- The NFU Mutual Insurance Society Limited (Central London County Court 9th July 2018) Mr Recorder Cohen Q.C. allowed an appeal by a claimant. He held that issues of mitigation of loss can only relate to matters that…
THE DANGERS OF PLEADING DISHONESTY: PART OF REPLY TO DEFENCE STRUCK OUT
In Canary Riverside Estate Management Ltd v Circus Apartments Ltd [2018] EWHC 1376 (Ch) Master Shuman provides an succinct summary of the principles relating to pleading dishonesty. Part of a Reply that alleged dishonesty was struck out. THE CASE The claimant…
LET US JUST IGNORE THE PLEADED CASE (MY PLEADED CASE ANYWAY): WHEN THE PARTIES COULDN’T EVEN AGREE ON A STATEMENT OF ISSUES
There is an interesting passage in the judgment of HHJ Klein (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in UK Learning Academy Ltd v The Secretary of State for Education [2018] EWHC 2915 (Comm). It relates to the statements of…
SIX YEARS ON: YOU SHOULD KNOW THE CASE YOU WANT TO PLEAD: CLAIMANT’S ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INABILITY TO PARTICULARISE CASE
The judgment of HHJ Platts in Wrightson -v- Flor Projects Limited [2018] EWHC 3036 (QB) provides, amongst other things, an important warning on the need to plead and particularise a case properly. The case shows that when a claimant has…
STATEMENTS OF CASE: KEEP THEM SIMPLE: NO NEED TO PLEAD A REFERENCE TO SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN IN A CASE ALLEGING BREACH OF CONTRACT
In Portland Stone Firms Ltd & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc & Ors [2018] EWHC 2341 (QB) Mr Justice Stuart-Smith had some telling observations about the way in which statements of case should be drafted. “The applications before the Court have…
PROVING THINGS 126: FAILURE TO PROVE DISHONESTY
The judgment in Autogas (Europe) Ltd v Ochocki & Ors [2018] EWHC 2345 (Ch) highlights the difficulties for a claimant who has to prove fraud as an essential element of their claim. The judgment also emphasises the needs to plead allegations…
WHO SIGNED THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH? THIS COULD BE A VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION: TICKING A BOX IS NOT SUFFICIENT
I am looking again at the judgment in Kassam -v- Gill (13th August 2018, County Court at Birmingham available on Lawtel). Here we look at the crucial question of who signed the statement of truth. A difficult concept when a claim form…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 12: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NON-ADMISSION AND A DENIAL
Some defences adopt a scattergun approach of “denying” everything. Some are more selective – they “put the Claimant to strict proof”. Many defences ignore the important distinction between a non-admission and a denial. THE DIFFERENCE IN A NUTSHELL If you…
PLEADING AND ARGUING FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: THE CLAIMANT KNEW WHAT WAS COMING (ON THIS OCCASION)
We have already looked at the factual findings in Pinkus v Direct Line [2018] EWHC 1671. Of equal interest is that part of the judgment where the judge considered the claimant’s argument that the defendant should not be allowed to argue fundamental…
DAMAGES CLAIMED BUT NOT PLEADED: REALLY STRANGE WITNESS STATEMENTS; PARTISAN EXPERTS: THE ICI CASE IS BACK IN COURT
If you are ever looking for an example of matters going awry in litigation then read the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Merit Merrell Technology Ltd [2018] EWHC 1577 (TCC). All the usual problematic issues…
LATE APPLICATION TO AMEND DEFENCE RIGHTFULLY REFUSED: LATE APPLICATION TO AMEND NOTICE OF APPEAL ALSO GOT THE BARNSLEY CHOP
In First Tower Trustees Ltd & Anor v CDS (Superstores International) Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1396 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision by the trial judge to refuse a late amendment to the defence. An application to amend the Notice…
I’M NOT TAKING A PLEADING POINT – BUT: FAILURE TO PUT A POINT IN CROSS-EXAMINATION NOT FATAL TO CLAIMANT’S CASE
The judgment in Auckland v Khan & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 1148 is in short form. However it does illustrate the difficulties of appealing on “pleading points” and findings of fact. “There are certainly cases in which the failure to put…
YOUR CLAIM FORM IS, WELL, PRETTY DAMN HOPELESS – AND WITNESS EVIDENCE CAN’T PUT IT RIGHT
The observations made by Mr Justice Andrew Baker in Orascom Tmt Investments SARL v Veon Ltd [2018] EWHC 985 (Comm) are of general interest. They highlight the need for statements of case to be properly particularised and also highlight the dangerous…
JUDICIALLY REVIEWING THE COUNTY COURT: PROCEDURAL CONFUSION, UNPLEADED POINTS AND THE HIGH STANDARD TO BE MET WHEN ATTEMPTING TO JUDICIALLY REVIEW A COUNTY COURT DECISION
There are many matters of interest in the short judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Watkins, R (On the Application Of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne County Court [2018] EWHC 1029, a rare example of a party trying to judicially review a…
WHEN THE LIMITATION ACT IS NOT YOUR BEST FRIEND: “SHEER INCOMPETENCE” DOES NOT PERSUADE A COURT TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION
CPR 17.(4) is always one of the most “challenging” sections of the Limitation Act in practice. Amending the name of a party after the expiry of the limitation period is not always easy. The judgment in Best Friends Group & Anor…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 5: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES: NOT A NUMBER-CRUNCHING EXERCISE
If there is anything that suffers from being taken for granted it is the basic schedule and counter-schedule. This is demonstrated in the judgment available today in Wright v Satellite Information Services Ltd [2018] EWHC 812 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip. The appeal…
ATTEMPTING TO RELY ON MATTERS WHERE PERMISSION TO AMEND HAD BEEN REFUSED: A BRIDGE TOO FAR
In Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Sarens (UK) Ltd [2018] EWHC 751 (TCC) the court rejected an attempt by a party to argue a case which had not been pleaded. The defendant had been refused permission to amend its defence and counterclaim…
STRIKING OUT A DEFENCE: FONT SIZE, LINE SPACING AND A MAXIMUM PAGE LENGTH ORDERED: PLEADINGS THAT “TEND TO OBFUSCATE RATHER THAN CLARIFY THE ISSUES”
In Brown & Anor (t/a Maple Hayes Hall School) v AB [2018] EWHC 623 (QB) Mr Edward Pepperall QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) struck out a defence that was . In giving the defendant another chance he made…
LATE AMENDMENT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
We looked at the decision in Nesbit Law Group LLP -v- Acasta European Insurance Company Limited (Leeds Mercantile Court 15.9.16) in an earlier post. The defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal Nesbit Law Group LLP v Acasta European Insurance Company Ltd [2018]…
DENTON CONSIDERED: ADDITIONAL ALLEGATIONS MADE IN RELATION TO A SOLICITOR FORGING A WITNESS STATEMENT
The Denton criteria were considered by Mr Justice Sweeney in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 94 (QB). These were considered in an an unusual context. There are allegations (and it must be stressed that these…