HATS OFF TO BUZZFEED: GOVERNMENT RESEARCH ON LITIGANTS IN PERSON FINALLY “DISCLOSED” (IN A MANNER)
This weekend I reported on the decision of District Judge Read that expressed profound concern about the fate of litigants of person in a family law case. Hats off to BuzzFeed which, after a tussle and an appeal to the…
REDUCTION IN VALUE OF CLAIM AND REDUCTION IN HOURLY RATES DID NOT REPRESENT A GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM THE BUDGET
In Jallow v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC B7 (Costs) Master Rowley rejected an argument that the settlement of a claim for a sum less than that claimed and a reduction in hourly rates for incurred costs represented “good reasons”…
IDENTIFYING THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY AND MAKING A COSTS ORDER: PARTIALLY SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED: DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY 60% OF THE COSTS.
In Wall v Munday [2018] EWHC 879 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) allowed an appeal in relation to costs. The judge at first instance had ordered the claimant to pay 80% of the defendant’s costs. That…
NO LUCK WHEN REACHING FOR THE SKY: LITIGANTS SEEKING A SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY FROM THE TRIAL JUDGE GET SHORT SHRIFT
In an earlier post about the case of P (A Child), Re [2018] EWCA Civ 720 we looked at an example where the parties (all the parties in the case) had correctly used the guidance in English v Emery Reimbold and Strick Ltd [2002]…
“UNSATISFACTORY IN TERMS OF PROCEDURAL HISTORY, PREPARATION, PROCESS AND OUTCOME”: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU TAKE LEGAL REPRESENTATION AWAY
John Vater QC, writing on Twitter, has – rightly- categorised the District Judge Read as a “hero”. When giving judgment in JY v RY [2018] EWFC B16 the judge made a number of telling observations about the profound implications of lack…
LATE SKELETON ARGUMENTS AND LATE EVIDENCE: THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO BETTER: DIVISIONAL COURT DECISION: A TEXTBOOK EXAMPLE OF WHAT NOT TO SAY AND DO
In The National Council for Civil Liberties (Liberty), R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor (Procedural Matters) [2018] HC 976 (Admin) the Divisional Court took care to file a supplemental judgment that dealt…
ADVOCACY: THE JUDGE’S VIEW SERIES 3: PART 1: THERE IS A SPECIAL RING IN HELL FOR A CERTAIN TYPE OF ADVOCATE (& YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE)
I had no plans for a further series on judge’s advice advocacy. However my hand was forced. I had to share the talk given by Lord Justice Irwin given to the Professional Negligence Bar Association on the 17th April. It…
VULNERABLE WITNESSES IN THE CIVIL COURTS: EXISTING GUIDANCE AND THE IICSA RECOMMENDATIONS
The criminal and family courts have developed sophisticated methods for dealing with vulnerable witnesses. There is relatively little guidance in the civil courts. This was an issue noted yesterday in the interim report of Independent Inquiry Child Sex Abuse. Here…
CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 6: NON-DISCLOSURE OF A PART 36 OFFER
This post is caused by some comments on Twitter this evening. A surprising number of cases where parties have, by one method or other, disclosed a Part 36 offer. This has been done by including the offers in the trial…
A JUDGMENT ADJOURNING A TRIAL: THE CLAIMANT DID NOT KNOW WHETHER THE ACTION WAS NECESSARY; THE TRIAL BUNDLE DID NOT HAVE THE KEY DOCUMENT (AND MORE)
The short judgment of Mr Justice Holman in Matthews v Matthews & Anor [2018] EWHC 906 (Fam) looks like a family case. However it is an inheritance claim and contains some surprising revelations. KEY POINTS If you are asking a judge…
NEW INSOLVENCY PRACTICE DIRECTION: CAME INTO FORCE TODAY: WATCH OUT FOR THIS
I am grateful to barrister Simon Bradshaw for pointing out that there is a new Practice Direction in force in relation to insolvency procedure. This was introduced today and comes into effect immediately. CHANGES The PD now refers to the…
SERENDIPITY AND THE SECRET BARRISTER: A TALE OF TWO T-SHIRTS
I was reminded yesterday that many of the people who read this blog do not have Twitter. They will not therefore know the result of the Secret Barrister T-shirt auction. A tale of high drama, contractual confusion, and eventual salvation …
SERVICE ON INSURER ALLOWED WHEN DRIVER COULD NOT BE IDENTIFIED: FACT THAT INSURER HAD AN ORDER DECLARING THE POLICY VOID NOT RELEVANT TO THIS ISSUE
In Farah v Abdullahi & Ors [2018] EWHC 738 (QB) Master Davison rejected an application by an insurer to set aside an order that allowed service of an unnamed driver upon the insurer. It was irrelevant that the insurer had obtained…
LEAVE TO APPEAL, APPEAL NOTICES AND THE NEED TO APPLY TO AMEND: COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS CRUCIAL: KNOW THE RULES
In Hickey v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2018] EWCA Civ 851 the Court of Appeal set out, in categorical terms, that parties should comply with the provisions relating to permission to appeal. In particular a party cannot…
UNREASONABLE FAILURE TO USE PROTOCOL WILL LEAD TO FIXED COSTS BEING AWARDED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: CPR 44 RULES THE DAY
In Williams v The Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy [2018] EWCA Civ 852 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of the personal injury protocol and fixed costs. It was held that CPR 44 has sufficient width…
THE SECRET BARRISTER: YOU’VE READ THE BOOK NOW GET THE (SIGNED) T-SHIRT: AUCTION FOR CHARITY
It is rare for a book about law to hit the best seller lists. It is even rarer for a law book to have merchandising. The Secret Barrister’s book, however, has produced a limited number of T-Shirts. To raise money…
PROVING THINGS 90 : THE TATTOO ARTIST & THE CACTUS SHOP: PRICK ME ONE MORE TIME
The opportunities for puns arising out of the issues in Martinez (t/a Prick) & Anor v Prick Me Baby One More Time Ltd (t/a Prick) & Anor [2018] EWHC 776 (IPEC) are obvious (and indeed are mentioned in the judgment itself)….
THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -v- CHANNEL 5 3: WHY A DEFENDANT SHOULD ALWAYS FILE A COSTS BUDGET: A REMINDER OF THE RULES
The final part of this trilogy on the judgment today in Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch) shows why the defendant will be kicking themselves for not filing a costs budget. Some defendants are fairly…
THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 2: CLAIMANTS FAILED TO BEAT PART 36 OFFER, NO GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM NORMAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES
This is the second post about the decision on costs in Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch). Here we look at the issue relating to Part 36. The defendant had made a Part 36 offer….
THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 1: THE ALLEGED FAILURE TO MEDIATE
The judgment on costs issues today in Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch) covers a number of issues. I am dealing with each distinct issue in a separate post. The first deals with costs following…