THE MITCHELL JUDGMENT AGAIN: PREVIOUS INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS
The issue of witness credibility in the Mitchell case has already been considered on this blog. However reading the transcript gives rise to more issues. Here we look at one – the significance of the previous statements made by…
MORE ON EVIDENCE AND CAUSATION: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE
The previous post dealt with issues of evidence and causation. Similar issues can be seen in the case of Irene Packham -v- Anita Hazari [2014] EWHC 3951 (QB), a decision of Michael Harvey Q.C. The issue of causation and evidence…
GETTING EVIDENCE TO TRIAL TO PROVE YOUR CASE: BE CAREFUL OF "MISSING" WITNESSES?
This has been, it has to be said, an interesting week for considering evidence in civil cases. Another interesting example can be found in the decision in Howmet Ltd -v- Economy Services Limited [2014] EWHC 3933 (TCC), a decision by…
WITNESS STATEMENTS AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY: GETTING BACK TO BASICS
If a litigant takes a matter to trial and the result rests, ultimately, on witness evidence, then those advising must (or at least should) have a clear and certain grasp of the factors governing witness credibility. This issue is almost…
THE MITCHELL CASE AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: CREDIBILITY, STRONG VIEWS AND RELIABILITY
The Mitchell case was at the forefront of attention a year ago when the Court of Appeal set out its (apparently widely misunderstood) views on relief from sanctions. It is even more in the headlines today. The case has been…
COSTS BUDGETING AND MORE CASE MANAGEMENT IN THE COURT OF PROTECTION? EXPECT IT SOON
It is only recently that the Court of Appeal has “opened its doors” so to speak on reports of its cases. The judgment of Peter Jackson J in A & B (Court of Protection: Delay & Costs) [2014] EWCOP 8…
DEVELOPMENTS SINCE DENTON: ALL THE POSTS AND CASES IN ONE PLACE
We are now exactly one year on since Mitchell and 237 days since Denton. This is a good a time as any to review the Post Denton decisions on this blog. It is interesting that there were no reports in…
SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT: SIGNATURE OF DISCLOSURE LISTS, CASE MANAGEMENT AND COMPLIANCE
The Supreme Court judgment in HRH Prince Abdulaziz Bin Mishal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud (Appellant) v Apex GlobalManagement Ltd and another (Respondents) [2014] UKSC 64 contains some important observations in relation to disclosure and case management. BACKGROUND TO THE CASE This…
MORE ON SKELETON ARGUMENTS: DO THEM PROPERLY OR YOU DON'T GET PAID (THE TRIQUEL)
For the third time in the past few months Jackson L.J. has spoken out against over-lengthy skeleton arguments. The costs of preparing those skeletons have been disallowed on each occasion. This is what happened in Inplayer Ltd -v- Thorogood [2014]…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT WAS TACTICALLY PLAYING FOR TIME
In Talos Capital Ltd -v- JSC Investment Holding Ltd (QBC 21/11/14)* Flaux J refused an application for an extension of time to acknowledge service and challenge the jurisdiction in circumstances where the delay was held to be deliberate and tactical….
WHAT COSTS AWARD SHOULD BE MADE AFTER A SPLIT TRIAL? A HIGH COURT DECISION
In Merck KGaA -v- Merck Sharp & Dhome Corpe [2014] EWHC 3920 (Ch) Mr Justice Nugee considered what order should be made as to costs after a claimant had succeeded on a trial of a preliminary issue. The judge held…
NOMINAL DAMAGES AWARD LEADS TO NO COSTS AT TRIAL & 25% OF COSTS ON APPEAL
In Walker -v- the Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis [2014] EWCA Civ 897 the Court of Appeal considered the appropriate costs award when a claimant succeeded on appeal but the appellate court held that he should only recover…
ONE YEAR LATE IN SERVING A WITNESS STATEMENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED – BUT ON TERMS
There is a report on Lawtel *of the case of Owners of Motor Vessel Coal Hunter -v- Owners of Motor Vessel Yusho Regulus (QBD Admiralty 20/11/2014, Teare J) where the court considered an application for permission to rely on a…
COSTS, PARTIES & PROPORTIONALITY: CONSTRUCTING AN ARGUMENT AS TO WHO SHOULD PAY WHAT
There are now an increasing number of cases reported where the judge sets out expressly their views in relation to costs. These are important reading. A good example is the decision of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in Laing O’Rourke Construction Ltd…
LITIGATION IN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENTERPRISE COURT: A TALE OF TWO DRESSES
The transcripts of cases in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Courts are often challenging reading. They regularly contain technical material which is difficult for the non-specialist to follow. However the case of John Kaldor Fabricmaker UK Ltd -v- Lee Ann Fashions…
STRESS, LITIGATION AND LITIGATORS: USEFUL LINKS TO AVOID AND DEAL WITH PROBLEMS
The post earlier this week on the solicitor who went to great lengths to make up litigation led to the most visitors to this blog in one day. It also led to wide coverage on twitter. What was noticeable was…
WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT HARM RATHER THAN HELP AND A FAILURE TO PROVE DAMAGES: A HIGH COURT CASE EXAMINED
In Re-Use Collections Limited -v- Sendall & May Glass Recycling Ltd [2014] EWHC 3852 (QB) H.H. Judge Davies made some important observations about drafting witness statements. It is positively unwise to “cross-reference” witness statements to the evidence of other witnesses…
HYBRID DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS: E-PETITION
There has been considerable controversy surrounding the decision not to implement “hybrid” Damages Based Agreements. There is now an e-petition calling for an open consultation on this issue. To view the petition click on the link above or here. Calls…
AN IMPORTANT CASE ON COSTS; "INTERESTED PARTY" COSTS; RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND SUMMARY ASSESSMENT
In Group M Uk Ltd -v- The Cabinet Office [2014] EWHC 3863 (TCC) Mr Justice Akenhead mad some important observations as to the liability to pay the costs of “interested parties”; the late serving of costs schedules; relief from sanctions…
CLAIMANT OBTAINED COSTS OF ACTION EVEN AFTER DISCONTINUANCE: WATCH THE WORDING OF CORRESPONDENCE
In Rokvic -v- Peacock [2014] EWHC 3729 (TC) the claimant obtained an order for costs against the defendant even though the claimant had discontinued the action. It is, if anything, a warning to be totally precise in wording when making offers and…
