Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Zenith Chambers, Leeds, & Hardwicke, London
Browse: Home » Summary judgment
JUDGE WAS WRONG TO IMPOSE SECURITY FOR COSTS ORDER IN RESPONSE TO WITNESS STATEMENT BEING SERVED LATE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

JUDGE WAS WRONG TO IMPOSE SECURITY FOR COSTS ORDER IN RESPONSE TO WITNESS STATEMENT BEING SERVED LATE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

February 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Summary judgment

In  Gama Aviation (UK) Ltd v Taleveras Petroleum Trading DMCC [2019] EWCA Civ 119 the Court of Appeal overturned a first instance decision where a summary judgment application was adjourned on terms that the defendant provided security for costs.  The defendant…

THE FACT THAT A DEFENDANT CANNOT PAY A JUDGMENT DOES NOT MAKE THE ACTION AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIMANT GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT

THE FACT THAT A DEFENDANT CANNOT PAY A JUDGMENT DOES NOT MAKE THE ACTION AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIMANT GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT

September 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Summary judgment

In Caribonum Pension Trustee Ltd & Anor v Pelikan Hardcopy Production AG [2018] EWHC 2321 (Ch) Master Clark rejected an argument that the fact that a defendant was never going to be able to pay a judgment meant that the action…

THE LIMITS OF DECLARATORY RELIEF: THE DANGERS OF APPLYING FOR IT: CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENTS (AND PLEADINGS) FAIL TO RAISE THE ROOF

THE LIMITS OF DECLARATORY RELIEF: THE DANGERS OF APPLYING FOR IT: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS (AND PLEADINGS) FAIL TO RAISE THE ROOF

June 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Striking out, Summary judgment

I am grateful to my colleague John de Waal QC at Hardwicke for  bringing my attention to the judgment of Mrs Justice O’Farrell in Office Depot International (UK) Ltd v UBS Asset Management (UK) Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 1494 (TCC).  It…

APPLICATIONS TO SET ASIDE SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDERS: A WORLD OF THEIR OWN: NOT QUITE CPR 39.(3) - BUT VERY CLOSE

APPLICATIONS TO SET ASIDE SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDERS: A WORLD OF THEIR OWN: NOT QUITE CPR 39.(3) – BUT VERY CLOSE

June 11, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Setting aside judgment, Summary judgment

A party seeking to set aside an order for summary judgment has to deal with principles that are almost unique.  This was emphasised in the judgment of Miss Penelpe Reed QC  in Phonographic Performance Ltd v Balgun (t/a Mama Africa) [2018]…

PROVING THINGS 109: WHEN A DEFENDANT IS ABLE TO OBTAIN SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

PROVING THINGS 109: WHEN A DEFENDANT IS ABLE TO OBTAIN SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

June 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Experts, Summary judgment

NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL SEE THE REPORT HERE  In Hewes v West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust & Ors [2018] EWHC 1345 (QB) Master Cook allowed a defendant’s application for summary judgment. It is a classic case of a…

PROVING THINGS 104: "THERE IS NO EVIDENCE BEFORE ME AS TO HOW THE PLAINTIFF WOULD PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF A GHOST"

PROVING THINGS 104: “THERE IS NO EVIDENCE BEFORE ME AS TO HOW THE PLAINTIFF WOULD PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF A GHOST”

May 24, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Summary judgment

I don’t normally travel too far from England and Wales in the Proving Things series. However a kind reader sent me an article on the Canadian decision in Ont. Inc. v K-W Labour Association et al, 2013 ONSC 5401 (CanLII).  It…

APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY: IF YOU WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT THEN MAKE SURE YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR IT

APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY: IF YOU WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT THEN MAKE SURE YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR IT

March 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Striking out, Summary judgment

On the 18th April 2018 I am,  with a number of my colleagues from Hardwicke, giving a talk on “Applications for Defendants”*.  The judgment this week in St Clair v King & Anor [2018] EWHC 682 (Ch) may well feature.   It…

SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT IN A NEGLIGENCE ACTION AGAINST SOLICITORS

SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT IN A NEGLIGENCE ACTION AGAINST SOLICITORS

February 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Professional negligence,, Summary judgment

I am grateful to my colleague at Hardwicke, Laurence Page, for sending me a transcript of the judgment of District Judge Langley in the case of Wright -v- Rix & Kay Solicitors, Central London County Court, 30/11/2017 (available here Wrighttranscript)….

LIMITATION: WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: LIMITATION PERIOD STARTS TO RUN ON DAY CAUSE OF ACTION BEGINS

LIMITATION: WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: LIMITATION PERIOD STARTS TO RUN ON DAY CAUSE OF ACTION BEGINS

February 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Limitation, Summary judgment

In Matthew & Ors v Sedman & Ors [2017] EWHC 3527 (Ch) His Honour Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) had to consider an interesting issue in relation to limitation.  “… where it is absolutely clear…

THE PERILOUS STRATEGY OF SERVING  EVIDENCE  LATE: DENTON APPLIES:  A RELEVANT FACTOR IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION

THE PERILOUS STRATEGY OF SERVING EVIDENCE LATE: DENTON APPLIES: A RELEVANT FACTOR IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION

January 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Extensions of time, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Summary judgment, Witness statements

The case of  Crown House Technologies Ltd v Cardiff Commissioning Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 54 (TCC) highlights the dangers of waiting to serve evidence until the last moment. If it is served late then a party requires permission of the…

THE PROBLEM IN OBTAINING AN ORDER YOU HAVEN'T ASKED FOR:AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 3.4 WILL NOT BE TREATED AS AN APPLICATION UNDER PART 24

THE PROBLEM IN OBTAINING AN ORDER YOU HAVEN’T ASKED FOR:AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 3.4 WILL NOT BE TREATED AS AN APPLICATION UNDER PART 24

January 11, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Striking out, Summary judgment

The judgment of Chief Master Marsh in Saeed & Anor v Ibrahim & Ors [2018] EWHC 3 (Ch) contains several important observations in relation to making applications.  The Master refused to treat an application, ostensibly made under CPR 3.4, as an…

YOU'VE SPENT £625,000 IN COSTS AND GOT NO FURTHER FORWARD: COSTS AFTER UNSUCCESSFUL SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION

YOU’VE SPENT £625,000 IN COSTS AND GOT NO FURTHER FORWARD: COSTS AFTER UNSUCCESSFUL SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION

September 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Costs, Summary judgment

In  Burnden Holdings (UK) Ltd & Anor v Fielding & Anor [2017] EWHC 2118 (Ch) His Honour Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) considered the issue of costs after the claimants’ unsuccessful application for summary judgment….

WHY LIFE IS NOW  DANGEROUS FOR DEFENDANTS (ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO DON'T FILE A DEFENCE ON TIME)

WHY LIFE IS NOW DANGEROUS FOR DEFENDANTS (ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO DON’T FILE A DEFENCE ON TIME)

July 21, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Default judgment,, Extensions of time, Relief from sanctions, Summary judgment

The judgment of Mr Justice Coulson in ADVA Optical Networking Limited -v- Optron Holding Limited  [2017] EWHC 1813 (TCC) highlights what a dangerous world this can be for defendants. A defendant who is late filing a defence, and where judgment has not been…

SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR THE DEFENDANT IN A FATAL ACCIDENT CASE: DODD -V- RAEBARN IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR THE DEFENDANT IN A FATAL ACCIDENT CASE: DODD -V- RAEBARN IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

June 21, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Summary judgment

I am grateful to my colleague Colm Nugent for supplying me with a copy of the judgment in Dodd -v- Raeburn [2017] EWCA Civ 439 *given today the Court of Appeal upheld an order giving summary judgment in a fatal…

CAN AN APPLICATION BE AMENDED? AN INTERESTING POINT TO START THE YEAR

January 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Summary judgment, Uncategorized

There are some procedural issues where you would assume that there was clear pre-existing authority in existence.  However, on examination (usually just before the hearing) it transpires that the point is a “novel” one.   In Agents Mutual Limited-v- Moginnie…

PROVING THINGS 32: DAMAGES CLAIM STRUCK OUT AS UNSUSTAINABLE; APPLICATION TO AMEND REFUSED.

September 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Striking out, Summary judgment, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Guney -v- Kingsley Napley [2016] EWHC 2349 (QB) Mrs Justice McGowan struck out part of the claimant’s claim for damages and refused the claimant permission to amend to plead new heads of damage. It could serve as an object…

"SECOND" ACTION FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE NOT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

July 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Striking out, Summary judgment, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Wright -v- Barts Health NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 1834 (QB) Mr Justice Edis refused the defendant’s application to strike out the claim or for summary judgment on the grounds that the claimant had settled an…

PROVING THINGS 18: DAMAGES; CAR HIRE; PROOF AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT

May 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Statements of Case, Summary judgment, Uncategorized

The burden is (usually) on a claimant to prove a loss.  There is an interesting discussion on the need to prove “need” in the decision of District Judge Read in Frankland -v- U.K. Insurance Ltd (10th August 2015) which was…

SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT WHEN THERE WERE ALLEGED DISPUTES OF FACT: DON'T PARK THE CAR

November 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Summary judgment, Uncategorized

Is it prudent to apply for summary judgment when there are alleged disputes of fact?  I am grateful to my colleague Colm  Nugent for sending me a copy of the judgment of  Mr Justice Cooke in Price -v- Euro Car…

DISPUTES OF FACT IN SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATIONS: THE APPROPRIATE TEST

October 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Summary judgment, Uncategorized

In Optaglio Limited -v- Tethal [2015] EWCA Civ 1002 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of how far a judge can determine disputed issues of fact in a summary judgment application. THE CASE The claimant was appealing an order…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2019. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
Legal Futures Civil Litigation Conference, 2019

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 15,238 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • “IF EVER THERE WERE A CASE IN WHICH THE COURT SHOULD REFUSE TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN FAVOUR OF GIVING THE CLAIMANTS ANY FURTHER INDULGENCE, THIS IS IT”
  • WHEN LITIGATION BECOMES A “VERBAL BRAWL”: DISCLOSURE MUST BE PROPORTIONATE
  • BACK TO BASICS 31: SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM AT THE “LAST KNOWN ADDRESS”: FIVE KEY POINTS
  • STRIKING OUT, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE PART 8 PROCEDURE: YOU CAN’T RELY ON MATTERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PLEADED: CLAIMANT’S CASE STRUCK OUT
  • PROVING THINGS 141: CREDIBILITY WAS IMPORTANT IN CLAIM FOR DAMAGES AGAINST SOLICITORS: SUPREME COURT RESTORES DECISION OF TRIAL JUDGE

Top Posts & Pages

  • "IF EVER THERE WERE A CASE IN WHICH THE COURT SHOULD REFUSE TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN FAVOUR OF GIVING THE CLAIMANTS ANY FURTHER INDULGENCE, THIS IS IT"
  • WHEN LITIGATION BECOMES A "VERBAL BRAWL": DISCLOSURE MUST BE PROPORTIONATE
  • BACK TO BASICS 31: SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM AT THE "LAST KNOWN ADDRESS": FIVE KEY POINTS
  • STRIKING OUT, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE PART 8 PROCEDURE: YOU CAN'T RELY ON MATTERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PLEADED: CLAIMANT'S CASE STRUCK OUT
  • PROVING THINGS 141: CREDIBILITY WAS IMPORTANT IN CLAIM FOR DAMAGES AGAINST SOLICITORS: SUPREME COURT RESTORES DECISION OF TRIAL JUDGE

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death
  • Personal Injury Litigation
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 3rd edition

Useful Links

  • Hardwicke
  • Justice- Standard Order for Directions
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • www.Bailii.org
  • Zenith Chambers
  • Zenith Personal Injury Blog

Archives

Copyright © 2019 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin