A DIFFICULT HEAD OF DAMAGE THAT MAY MAKE THE JUDGE WANT TO RETIRE: BOOK REVIEW: PIBA GUIDE TO PENSION LOSS CALCULATION: JAMES ROWLEY Q.C. & MATTHEW WHITE
The loss, or reduction, of income due to a personal injury is one of the primary concerns to most victims. Loss of earnings is a matter that is often under-explored in many texts relating to damages. This is even more…
THE TREATMENT OF EXPERT EVIDENCE AND APPEALS: ANOTHER CASE WHERE A JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF A DEFENDANT IS OVERTURNED
There has been much online discussion about the impact that the decision in Griffiths v TUI UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 2268 (QB) will have in relation to food poisoning cases and more generally. That case related specifically to the treatment of…
THE NIGHTINGALE COURTS: WHERE THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY COVER
HMCTS has published a list of “Nightingale Courts. Details are available here. Site Address Opening date Business being heard East Pallant House East Pallant Chichester PO19 1TY Monday 20 July 2020 Civil work from Worthing County Court and family work from Worthing…
NIGHTINGALE COURT IN LEEDS: STARTING 28th AUGUST 2020: BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AND CIVIL CASES: GUIDANCE FOR USERS
A “Nightingale Court” has started in Leeds from the 28th August 2020. It is being run at Cloth Hall Court, Quebec Street, Leeds. Below I have the formal notice from HMCTS and the guidance that has been issued to users…
WHEN SHOULD A LITIGATION FRIEND BE LIABLE FOR COSTS? INTERESTING COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Glover v Barker & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 1112 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision where costs were awarded against a litigation friend. It is a particularly important judgment for those acting as litigation friends for defendants. THE…
NEWTON’S LAW AND COMMUNICATING WITH THE COURT: THE NEED FOR PARTIES TO GO THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE
There are is brief passage in the judgment of Mr Recorder Allen QC in G v C [2020] EWFC B35 (OJ) (16 July 2020) that is of general application. “The communication has served to demonstrate Newton’s third law of…
EXTENSION OF STAY OF POSSESSION PROCEEDING TO THE 20th SEPTEMBER 2020
The Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 5) (Coronavirus) Rules 2020 extend the stay on possession proceedings from the 23rd August to the 20th September 2020. THE RULES The rules can be found here. WHAT THE RULES DO The mechanism is…
“WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NON-ADMISSION AND A DENIAL” ? A SEARCH TERM THAT COMES UP FREQUENTLY
On the 3rd September 2020 I am presenting a webinar on Pleadings (Statements of Case) for Personal Injury Lawyers. One of the issues being looked at is drafting a defence. One of the regular search terms that lead to this…
LEXLAW -v- ZUBERI: PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED
I wrote in July about the decision in Lexlaw Ltd v Zuberi [2020] EWHC 1855 (Ch) (10 July 2020) in relation to the validity of a damages based agreement. Practitioners may like to know that permission to appeal has been granted by…
THE LIMITATION PERIOD, PERSONAL INJURY AND THE RESTORATION OF A COMPANY: A HIGH COURT DECISION
In Holmes v S & B Concrete Ltd [2020] EWHC 2277 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer considered the issues surrounding the claimant’s argument that the limitation period in a personal injury action was suspended when a company was wound up….
EXPERT EVIDENCE UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: THE TRIAL JUDGE CANNOT OVERTURN CONCLUSIONS OF A “UNCONTROVERTED” EXPERT: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Griffiths v TUI UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 2268 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer considered the question of the approach of the trial judge to “uncontroverted” expert evidence. He overturned the decision of the trial judge in favour of the…
COVID-19 Clinical Negligence Protocol 2020
A Protocol has been introduced between SCIL, NHS Resolution and AVMA, which deals with the conduct of personal injury litigation. Details can be found here. SUMMARY The press release has a useful summary “The protocol is wide-ranging, covering: moratoriums…
SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE: AN OVERVIEW AND THE CASES: THE RELEVANT GUIDANCE CONSIDERED
The previous post about the Court of Appeal decision today in relation to similar fact evidence provides an opportunity to recap on some basic principles. OVERVIEW OF THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES A detailed review of the cases appears below. By…
PROVING PROPENSITY AND SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY
In the judgment today in R v P (Children: Similar Fact Evidence) [2020] EWCA Civ 1088 the Court of Appeal set out the principles relating to similar fact evidence in civil and family cases. The case is also an example…
REMOTE HEARINGS: ZOOM PLATFORM USED, AND WORKED: ALSO AN ENTRY FOR THE OPENING LINE OF JUDGMENT CONTEST: “FAMILY LAW CRAVES FINALITY”
In LB v DB [2020] EWFC B34 (OJ) Deputy District Judge Hodson expressed his dissatisfaction with telephone hearings, but found that a zoom hearing worked. This has not been a platform viewed with favour by the court authorities, yet appears…
PROVING THINGS 181: THE ART GALLERY, THE MILKMAN AND THE 1992 REGULATIONS…
It is rare for this blog to look at Scottish cases. However the judgment of the Sheriff Appeal Court in APPEAL BY ANDREW WRIGHT v NATIONAL GALLERIES OF SCOTLAND [2020] ScotSAC Civ 6 raises an issue that is common to…
COSTS BUDGETING: PRECEDENT T: EXCEL VERSION
I am grateful to Sean Linley for sending me an excel version of the new Precedent T. It gives me another chance to remind people of the new rules that come into force and and post photos of cars that…
SERVICE, JURISDICTION AND WASTED COSTS: A CASE TO POINT
We looked earlier at the judgment of Master Cook in Jovicic & Ors v The Serbian Orthodox Church-Serbian Patriarchy [2020] EWHC 2229 (QB) in relation to late service of the claim form. That judgment also considers the wasted costs application….
PROVING THINGS 180: ACCEPTING A LIFT WITH A DRUNKEN DRIVER, WHILST DRUNK: DEFENDANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH THAT FAILING TO WEAR A SEAT BELT MADE A DIFFERENCE
The judgment today of HHJ Robinson (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Campbell v Advantage Insurance Company Ltd [2020] EWHC 2210 (QB) makes interesting reading. 1. A claimant cannot properly argue that he was too drunk himself…
PROVING THINGS 179: SECRETARY OF STATE’S “SUPERFICIAL INVESTIGATION” FAILS TO PROVE THAT DEFENDANT WAS A DE FACTO DIRECTOR
In the judgment given today in Secretary of State for Business, Energy And Industrial Strategy v Rahman [2020] EWHC 2213 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews found that the Secretary of State had failed to prove that the defendant had ever been…