2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – A ROUND UP OF THE ROUND UPS: WHAT TO FRET ABOUT AND WHAT NOT TO FRET ABOUT…
There have been a series of annual reviews on key topics throughout December. To round off the year it seemed a good idea to provide a reminder of them all and put the links in one place 2019 AND CIVIL…
CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF “LAWYER OF THE YEAR 2019”: ISHAN KOLHATKAR : HARD WORK, UNDER PRESSURE OF TIME LED TO A REMARKABLE RESULT
There was never any doubt about who was going to be the “lawyer of the year” – the editor in chief (indeed the only editor) of the Billable Hour Cookbook – Ishan Kolhatkar. THE ACHIEVEMENT Ish took what was…
CIVIL LITIGATION CASE OF THE YEAR: BATES -v- THE POST OFFICE: LITIGATING IN THE FACE OF “INSTITUTIONAL PARANOIA”
There was never any doubt in my mind as to the civil litigation case of the year – Bates -v- The Post Office. All civil litigation is here, witness and expert evidence, allegations of bias, disclosure and much more. One…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: FACTS, FIGURES AND SEARCH TERMS: “CAN A DEAD PERSON BE TAKEN TO COURT?”
The statistics at the end of the year are always interesting (to me at least). The search terms that lead to this blog can be quite illuminating (and sometimes quite alarming…). MOST READ POSTS OF 2019 After seven years…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: “THE KANGAROO COURTS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM”
In January I wrote “I am starting to lose count of the number of times the Court of Appeal has overturned decisions committing people to prison because of very basic and fundamental failures of procedure. It is as though all…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: WELL BEING: LOOKING AFTER OURSELVES SO WE CAN LOOK AFTER OTHERS
This year has seen a large number of posts on avoiding stress and dealing with the difficulties that lawyers can have in litigation. MARCH: FIND MUGGLES AND DISCONNECT FROM YOUR WORK: “LAWYERS JUST NEED TO HAVE FUN” March had…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: COSTS BUDGETING
This year has been relatively quiet on the costs budgeting front. There have been some rule changes and two cases which highlight how difficult it is to appeal a costs budgeting decision. JULY:AN OFFER AS TO COSTS DOES NOT BECOME…
BILLABLE HOUR COOKBOOK – NOW ON PERMANENT SALE: AN EDUCATIONAL AND CULINARY EXPERIENCE ALL ROLLED INTO ONE
The Billable Hour Cookbook is now on permanent sale. For those who did not pre-order it can be bought online. It makes for an interesting read, in addition to the recipes. You can find out a lot about people by…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 76: APPEALS – ASKING THE JUDGE FOR REASONS: “EMBARRASSMENT” IS NO EXCUSE NOT TO
The judgment in Fattahi v Charles Grosvenor Ltd [2019] EWHC 3497 (QB) also highlights the advisability of an appellant, arguing that a decision was not properly reasoned, to ask the original judge for further reasons. “I have been unable to…
“THEY LOST”: THE DANGERS OF OVERCONFIDENCE IN CORRESPONDENCE
“Never write anything you will be embarrassed by the court reading” is an essential piece of advice for all lawyers (and one I suspect we have all, occasionally, breached). An example can be seen in the opening lines of the…
PART 36, FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIMS AND PRE-ACTION SETTLEMENT: A POINT FOR BOTH CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS TO WATCH
The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Kore v Brocklebank [2019] EWHC 3491 (QB) raises some interesting issues in relation to Part 36 and fatal accident claims. It means that both claimants and defendants will have to take considerable care…
THE COURT WILL NOT READILY IMPLY SANCTIONS INTO ORDERS THAT DO NOT EXPRESSLY CONTAIN SANCTIONS: AN EARLY CHRISTMAS PRESENT FOR LITIGATORS
In Djurberg v London Borough of Richmond & Ors [2019] EWHC 3342 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh held that a party did not require relief from sanctions when it failed to comply with a court order that did not impose a…
APPEALING A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT IS NOT A JAMBOREE: APPELLANT HAS TO STATE WHAT THEY ARE APPEALING AND HEARING IS CONFINED TO THOSE MATTERS
In PME v The Scout Association [2019] EWHC 3421 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart upheld the decision of Master Leonard in relation to the scope of an appeal from a costs officer. “The consequences of the Appellant’s case are wholly undesirable….
WITNESS EVIDENCE AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: TO WHAT EXTENT IS “HYPOTHETICAL” EVIDENCE FROM DOCTORS ADMISSIBLE?
The judgment of Mrs Justice Lambert in AB v East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust [2019] EWHC 3542 (QB), provides an important lessons for those who draft witness statements, particularly on behalf of defendants in clinical negligence cases. The question is…
INTEREST ON PART 36 OFFERS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: “THE LAW REPORTS ARE OVER-FULL OF CASES IN WHICH PARTIES MADE OFFERS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF PART 36 AND THEN UNSUCCESSFULLY SOUGHT TO OBTAIN THE PART 36 BENEFITS LATER”
In King -v- City of London Corporation [2019] EWCA Civ 2266 the Court of Appeal set out the position in relation to whether an offer exclusive of interest can be made. I am grateful to Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose…
COSTS AGAINST A NON-PARTY: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED
I am grateful to Colm Nugent for sending me a copy of the decision of Veronique Buehrlen Q.C in Rubiera -v- Building & Handyman Group Ltd (13th December 2019). It relates to a non-part costs order being made against a…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: PART 36: THE GROWTH IN CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFERS – AND WHY THE CONSEQUENCES USUALLY APPLY
Looking back it is clear that this has been a very busy year for cases on Part 36. Part of the reason for this has been the growth in cases relating to claimant’s offers. There are a number of key…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 75: COSTS BUDGETING: COUNSEL’S BRIEF FEE NOW PART OF THE TRIAL PREPARATION PHASE
Judging from the reaction of my opponent (and the judge) at a CCMC I attended today a change in the rules introduced on 1st October 2019 could benefit from wider publication. On the 1st October 2019 Counsel’s brief fee is…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 74: HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND SECTION 4 OF THE CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1995
The judgment of Deputy Master Linwood in Barnaby & Anor v Johnson (aka Smith) [2019] EWHC 3344 (Ch) provides a reminder of the terms of Section 4 of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and an example of its application. …
63 YEARS ON AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES: MUNKMAN ON DAMAGES – ALBEIT WITH A NEW TITLE (1)
The latest edition of what, used to be called, Munkman on Damages is now hot off the press. This is the 14th edition, the first being written in 1956. In this post I look at the history of the book…