BOUNDARIES, BORDERS AND COSTS: IF YOU LEAVE THE ISSUE OF COSTS TO THE JUDGE YOU MAY NOT GET THE ANSWER YOU WANT
The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Powles -v- Reeves [2016] EWCA Civ 1375 shows the dangers of not being able to agree the principle of who should pay the costs of litigation. It shows the dangers of just…
PROVING THINGS 61: MORE ON SOCIAL MEDIA: FACEBOOK ENTRIES AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY
Facebook and social media play an increasingly important part in litigation. We have looked at several cases where social media has played a critical part in the assessment of witness credibility. Facebook played a part of the judgment today of…
PRESSING THE WRONG BUTTON: THE PERILS OF EMAIL “REPLY ALL” IN LITIGATION (OR ARBITRATION)
Many, if not all, of us will have made some errors with emails on some occasion. There is a danger, however, when this happens in litigation. This can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Popplewell in T -v-…
NOTES FROM A BELEAGUERED BENCH: THE IRON FIST AND NO VELVET GLOVER
There is a section on this blog which has links to posts and articles on procedure. Usually I am content to post the link and lead to it readers to look at it themselves. The article by Peter Glover in…
APPLICATIONS TO AMEND APPEAL NOTICE AND PARTICULARS AT A LATE STAGE NOT ALLOWED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
I am grateful to Jill Greenfield from Field Fisher for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal transcript in Howe -v- Motor Insurers Bureau (CA 8th February 2017). This is a judgment refusing permission to amend and for…
MACHISMO OR MADNESS? THE DANGERS OF MAKING A “TIME LIMITED” OFFER OR WITHDRAWING A PART 36 OFFER
There may be tactical advantages to making a “time limited” offer, or withdrawing a Part 36 offer after 21 days. However this can backfire badly. We have already looked at the decision in Thakkar -v- Singh [2017] EWCA 117 in…
MERRIX NOT BEING APPEALED (BUT HARRISON IS – WATCH THIS SPACE)
The decision in Merrix -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 346 (QB) is not being appealed by the defendant. The rationale is, apparently, that the defendant did not want to risk losing the listing of the appeal in Harrison…
INTEREST ON AWARD NOT AUTOMATIC: A DECISION WHERE NO INTEREST WAS AWARDED
The question of when, and whether, interest should be awarded is one of these issues in litigation that receives little coverage. In Pinfold -v- Ansell [2017] EWHC 889 (Ch) HHJ David Cooke decided not to award interest at all. It…
MEDIATION AND LITIGATION: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE DANGERS OF IGNORING OFFERS TO MEDIATE
This blog reports regularly on cases where the courts have highlighted the advantages of mediation and the dangers of rejecting an offer to mediate. The latest note of cautious comes from the judgment of Lord Justice Jackson in Thakkar -v-…
BILL OF £101,677.21 AND THE CLAIMANT ENDS UP WITH £2,515.60: MISCONDUCT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS HAS SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES
I am grateful to Justin Edwards of BLM solicitors for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Whalan in Jago -v-Whitbread a decision of Master Whalan. A copy of that case is attached here ( 2016.10.05 – Approved Judgment)….
FILING FORM H: WHEN DOES A CASE HAVE A VALUE OF “LESS THAN £50,000”? A POINT TO WATCH
There are now several formats for Form H. The “short” one page version is now used in cases where the value is between £25,000 and “less than £50,000”. Some judges are interpreting this strictly to read between £25,000 and £49,999″….
CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: STILL A MAJOR PROBLEM: PROCEDURAL ERRORS ARE “INEVITABLE”
We have had graphic examples recently of cases where committal proceedings in civil, or family, proceedings have gone badly wrong. In LL -v- Lord Chancellor [2017] EWCA Civ 237, the Court of Appeal held that the procedure adopted…
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WRITE: THE SUPREME COURT MAY READ IT ONE DAY (AND IT MAY END UP ON A BLOG SOMEWHERE…)
There has already been some interesting debate on Twitter about one aspect of the Supreme Court decision in Times -v- Flood [2017] UKSC 33 that has not made the headlines. Dominic Regan observed that the case is another example…
DELAY, DENTON, APPEALS AND CROSS-APPEALS: EXTENSION OF TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED
In Pinisetty -v-Manikonda [2017] EWHC 838 (QB) Mr Justice Langstaff considered an issue relating to an appeal (and cross-appeal) being out of time. Although the judgment on this issue is largely academic (the appeal failed in any event), it contains…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: CHANGING WITNESS STATEMENTS, DESTROYED DOCUMENTS AND THE DEFENDANT’S WITNESS WITH NO CREDIBILITY AT ALL
The judgment of Mr Justice Goss in RE -v- Calderdale & Huddersfield Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 824 (QB) shows some concern about the nature of the evidence adduced by the defendant. Documents had been (inadvertently) destroyed and definitely altered. Witnesses…
ISSUING PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION ARE TAKEN OUT: A FATAL ERROR FROM THE OUTSET
In Qunintana -v- Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust 28/03/2017 Master Cook upheld the established principle that an action cannot be brought by administrators of an estate before the letters of administration are taken out. Proceedings cannot later be amended…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED TO DEFENDANT WHO APPEARED BY COUNSEL: A “SURPRISING STATE OF AFFAIRS” PUT RIGHT
There may well be a term for the process by which a number of decisions, which appeared sensible at the time they were made, lead to a ridiculous result. This principle may well apply to what happened in Falmouth House…
PROVING THINGS 60: PUTTING SEAWEED OUT OF THE WINDOW: THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE AND THE JUDGE WHO WAS EVEN-HANDEDLY OFFENSIVE:
The Court of Appeal judgment in McBride -v- UK Insurance Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 144 has been covered widely on the issue of the appropriate rate for car hire charges after an accident. However less widely discussed is the fact that,…
KNOW (AND FOLLOW) THE RULES – OR ELSE: DPP COPS IT.
There is some irony in the decision of Mr Justice Fraser in R (RA) -v- The Director of Public Prosecutions [2017] EWHC 714 (Admin). The claimant, a litigant in person, complied with the rules. The defendant, a specialised government department…
BANKS, WITNESSES AND CREDIBILITY: AN INTERESTING JUDGMENT
There are many reasons why lawyers should read the decision in Thomas -v- Triodos Bank NV [2017] EWHC 314 (QB). There is an interesting consideration of the duty of care a bank owes a customer and the Hedley Byrne principles….
JUDICIAL INTERVENTION, INTERRUPTIONS AND HOT TUBBING: JUDICIAL LATITUDE IS NOT UNLIMITED
In Shaw -v- Grouby [2017] EWCA Civ 233 the Court of Appeal made some observations about the dangers of a judge getting too inquisitorial in the course of a trial, particularly in the course of cross-examination. “The judge intervened in…
FILE A SKELETON ARGUMENT – IT IS MANDATORY
Many of the posts about skeleton arguments on this blog have been about content (usually length), The surprising aspect of R -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 639 (Admin) is that both sides decided not to file…
THE TRIAL JUDGE AND FINDINGS OF FACT: COURT OF APPEAL DID NOT OVERTURN FINDINGS OF TRIAL JUDGE
A disappointed insurer failed in its attempt to overturn findings of a trial judge in Hamid -v- Khalid [2017] EWCA Civ 201. “The task of a trial judge is difficult enough without having to deal expressly with every single piece…
WHEN THE EVIDENCE OF THE “INDEPENDENT” WITNESS IS NOT ACCEPTED: WHEN WE WILL EVER LEARN?
In a case where there are disputed facts a party that has an independent witness usually holds a strong hand. However in Elson -v- Stilgoe [2017] EWCA Civ 193 today the Court of Appeal upheld a decision where the trial…
PLEADINGS, FACTS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: EXPERT SHOULD NOT “USURP THE FUNCTION OF THE COURT”
There is an interesting discussion of the purpose of pleadings and expert evidence in the judgment of HH Parkes QC in PP -v- The Home Office [2017] EWHC 663 (QB). The fact that an expert report is referred to in…
LIMITING CLAIM TO £10,000 DID NOT PREVENT COURT AWARDING £140,000: CPR 16.3(7) IN USE
In the judgment today in Harrath -v- Stand for Peace Ltd [2017] EWHC 653 (QB) Sir David Eady awarded £140,000 in a case where the claim form limited the claim to £10,000. This is an interesting development in an environment where…
WHEN PUBLIC OFFICIALS MAKE WITNESS STATEMENTS: FAREPAK REVISITED
There was a post earlier this week where a public official faced contempt of court proceedings that was “false and tended to mislead”, and was acquitted because the statement was “careless” rather than criminal. This provides a good opportunity to…
INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: READ (AND CITE) THE CORRECT CHAPTER OF COOK ON COSTS
I am grateful to John McQuater for sending me a copy of an order from HH Judge Robinson, It relates to an application on account of costs. The appeal was (for obvious reasons) compromised. However the robust terms of the…
A JUDGE CANNOT GIVE PERMISSION TO APPEAL AFTER THE HEARING: MONROE -v- HOPKINS – SECOND ROUND
The case of Monroe -v- Hopkins [2017] EWHC 645 (QB) is the second judgment on the case. The judgment today related solely to the defendant’s application for permission to appeal. The judge ruled that he did not have jurisdiction to…
WHEN A PUBLIC OFFICIAL SIGNS A “CARELESS” WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS “FALSE AND TENDED TO MISLEAD”: NOT IMPRESSIVE TO SAY THE LEAST
There are many cases that show a surprisingly insouciant approach to accuracy by those who draft, and those who sign, witness statements. This insouciance is even more surprising when the person who has signed the statement is a public official,…
INTEREST ON DAMAGES AFTER FAILING TO BEAT A CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER: THE AIM IS TO ENCOURAGE GOOD PRACTICE AND NOT SIMPLY TO COMPENSATE
In Ovm Petrom SA -v- Glencore International SA [2017] EWCA Civ 195 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision not to award 10% interest on damages in a case where a defendant failed to beat a claimant’s Part 36 offer….
“SOLICITOR FORCING ME TO SIGN AN INCORRECT WITNESS STATEMENT”: A VERY FRIGHTENING SEARCH TERM
It is possible to see some of the search terms that lead people to this blog (I should stress that there are no details of who made the search). One of the search terms yesterday was “solicitor forcing me to…
PROVING THINGS 59: TO GET SPECIAL DAMAGES YOU HAVE TO PLEAD THEM AND PROVE THEM (EVEN IN DEFAMATION CASES)
In Lisle-Mainwaring -v- Associated Newspapers Ltd [2017] EWHC 543 (QB) Judge Parkes QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) declined to award the claimant special damages for financial outlay on the grounds that they were never properly…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED AFTER SECRETARY OF STATE RELIED UPON AN OUTDATED REFERENCE IN THE WHITE BOOK
In AM (Pakistan) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 180 the Court of Appeal granted relief after an appeal was filed late. The appellant had relied upon an out of date commentary in the white…
PROVING THINGS 58 : FAILURE TO PROVE CAUSATION LEADS TO AWARD OF NOMINAL DAMAGES
For the third time in recent weeks I write about a case where a claimant has spent much time, energy (and no doubt money) in bringing an action but only recovered nominal damages. In Plantation Holdings (FZ) LLC -v- Dubai…
NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER WHEN UNSUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT HAD TURNED DOWN A PART 36 OFFER OF £500,000
In Lyons -v- Fox Williams LLP [2017] EWHC 532 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered issues relating to costs after a claimant had been unsuccessful in a claim for professional negligence. THE CASE The claimant had been unsuccessful in a claim…
ADJOURNMENTS, ILL HEALTH, FAIRNESS AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS CASE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS
In Dove -v- London Borough of Havering [2017] EWCA Civ 156 the Court of Appeal considered a number of procedural issues prior to giving judgment on the substantive point. The defendants argued that they should have been granted an adjournment of…
APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF KNOWLEDGE IN AN ACTION AGAINST THE MIB
In Whyatt -v- Powell & the Motor Insurers Bureau [2017] EWHC 484 (QB) Mr Justice Lewis overturned the findings of the trial judge that three claimants had knowledge that a driver was not insured. The judgment considers what inferences a…
WITHDRAWAL OF PART 36 OFFER BY EMAIL: CPR 3.10 SAVES THE CLAIMANT
The change in the discount rate meant that many claimants withdraw Part 36 offers they had made. This has led to the question – is an email withdrawing an offer sufficient. I am grateful to Dominic Graham from Holmes &…
AN INVITATION: LORD DYSON, LEEDS, 23rd MARCH 2017: “50 YEARS OF CHANGE IN THE LAW: EVOLUTION OR REVOLUTION”
Lord Dyson, the former Master of the Rolls, is giving the annual Munkman lecture this Thursday the 23rd March in central Leeds. There are still some places available. As always with a Munkman Lecture Zenith Chambers invites all practitioners,…
PROVING SERVICE BY FAX: OPERATOR OF A FAX MACHINE IS A “RESPONSIBLE PERSON”
In a judgment today in LBI EHF -v- RAIFFEISEN ZENTRALBANK ÖSTERREICH AG [2017] EWHC 522 (Comm) Mr Justice Knowles CBE had to consider whether the fact that a party could not find a fax meant that it had not been served. This involved…
JUDGMENTS CANNOT EASILY BE RE-OPENED: NOR IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE PRIVILEGE EASILY WAIVED
In Gillian -v- HEC Enterprises Ltd [2017] EWHC 461 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan considered an application to reconsider and re-open an earlier judgment, The judgment contains interesting observations about attempts to “reopen” court decisions, the use and alleged waiver of “without…
“AGREED” COSTS BUDGETS NOT APPROVED BY THE COURT : THAT QC IS JUST TOO EXPENSIVE – THINK AGAIN
In Brown -v- BCA Trading Limited [2016] EWHC 1464 (Ch) Mr Registrar Jones refused to approve “agreed” budgets. He held that the fees of leading counsel were too high and needed to be reconsidered. This shows that an agreement between…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWS APPEAL AND GRANTS RELIEF WHEN THE ORIGINAL ORDER WAS PRE-DENTON
It is surprising, perhaps embarrassing, that the Court of Appeal is still hearing appeals where the judge at first instance applied the pre-Denton approach to relief from sanctions. However a judgment today involved just that*. In Patterson -v- Spencer [2017]…
SCOTTISH CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES: CHANGES NORTH OF THE BORDER: USEFUL LINKS (WITH PHOTOS)
Civil procedure in Scotland is undergoing major changes. In preparing for a talk at the Royal Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow I looked at quite a few posts and articles to help me understand what was going on (and to…
EXPERT EVIDENCE AND EXPERT CREDIBILITY: DISCLOSING KNOWLEDGE OF THE PARTIES IS IMPORTANT
In Thefaut -v- Johnson [2017] EWHC 497(QB) Mr Justice Green made some important observations about the need for experts to be candid about their prior knowledge of, and relationships with, the parties to the action. A failure to mention knowledge…
COSTS AFTER NOMINAL DAMAGES AND PART 36 OFFERS: THE CLAIMANTS WHO TURNED DOWN £1.5 MILLION AND GOT £2.00 INSTEAD
We looked at the decision of Mr Justice Leggatt in Marathon Asset Management LLP -v- Seddon [2017] EWHC 300 (Comm) in an earlier post. The judge held that the defendants were in breach but that the claimants had suffered no loss….
COSTS NORMALLY FOLLOW THE EVENT: SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT ENTITLED TO 100% OF ITS COSTS
We looked at the decision in Oldcorn -v- Southern Water Services Ltd [2017] EWHC in an earlier post. A second judgment on the case on the issue of costs is reported at [2017] EWHC 460 (TCC). . The successful defendant was…
COSTS, CONDUCT, PART 36, COSTS BUDGETING: THE SECOND JUDGMENT IN GIANT CAR LIMITED
The previous post looked at the judgment of Mr Stephen Furst QC in Car Giant Limited -v- the Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hammersmith [2017] EWHC 197 (TCC). Here we look at the subsequent judgment on costs at [2017]…
PROVING THINGS 57: LEASE SAID SOONEST MENDED: CLAIM FOR SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGES FAILS (AND GUESS THE REASON)
This series often looks at cases that have floundered at trial – usually because of the absence of basic evidence to prove a litigant’s case. This can be seen again in the judgment of Mr Stephen Furst QC in Car…
You must be logged in to post a comment.