CIVIL PROCEDURE (NOT-CORONAVIRUS): BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – AUGUST 2020
A round up of blogs and articles about procedure, evidence and damages published in August 2020.
Costs
DAC Beachcroft – Beware of costs sanctions if your conduct falls out of line
Costs Barrister – Crypto tokens and litigation funding
Litigation Futures – Judge refuses payment out of court for all of defendants’ legal fees
Litigation Futures – Firm ordered to pay wasted costs for “negligent conduct”
Litigation Futures – Council must pay costs of redacting documents for journalist
Herbert Smith Freehills – DEFENDANT AWARDED ITS COSTS WHERE CLAIMANT FAILED TO BEAT WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER, AS THE OFFER SHOULD HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED WHEN IT WAS ON THE TABLE
Negligence & Personal Injury
DAC Beachcroft – Fundamental Dishonesty: Appeal Decision Pays Off
DAC Beachcroft – Is breach of a statutory duty evidence of negligence?
Herbert Smith Freehills – THE LAW OF SOLICITORS’ LIABILITIES, FOURTH EDITION PUBLISHED
Evidence
Kingsley Napley – Disclosure of documents subject to implied undertakings
DAC Beachcroft – High Court rules that discovery documentation requested in “tiger kidnapping” case is not protected by public interest privilege
DAC Beachcroft – Norwich Pharmacal Relief and Rogue Twitter Accounts
DAC Beachcroft – Avoiding the risk of inadvertent waiver of privilege
DAC Beachcroft – Disclosure – Damaging Documents
Herbert Smith Freehills – SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES PROPER APPROACH TO ASSESSING WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE WHERE COURT FINDS SERIOUS POSSIBILITY (BUT NOT PROBABILITY) IT WAS OBTAINED BY TORTURE
Herbert Smith Freehills – SPLIT TRIALS, SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENTS AND THE NEED FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS
Summary Judgment
DAC Beachcroft – High Court refuses summary judgment application over failure to sufficiently plead particulars of debt claimed
Brexit and Jurisdiction
Litigation Futures – Law Society warns of “havoc” if courts depart from EU law
Herbert Smith Freehills – COURT OF APPEAL GIVES WIDE INTERPRETATION TO “DAMAGE” FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE COMMON LAW JURISDICTIONAL GATEWAY FOR TORT CLAIMS
Kerry Underwood
- DETAILED ASSESSMENT: SOME TIPS
- CIVIL LITIGATION FUNDING AGREEMENTS: PART 1: CONTINGENCY FEE AGREEMENTS
- LITIGANTS IN PERSON: WHY I THINK THEY SHOULD BE BANNED
- INTEREST ON COSTS
- SOCIAL SECURITY: MISCELLANEOUS: UPPER TRIBUNAL CASES 2019/20
- FOOTBALL MEETS THE LAW: PART 36 OFFERS IN FOOTBALL
- SOCIAL SECURITY: CHILD SUPPORT: UPPER TRIBUNAL CASES 2019/20
- LEGAL SERVICES CONSUMER PANEL: SCRAP ALL THE WATCHDOGS SAYS KERRY UNDERWOOD
- SOCIAL SECURITY: PERSONAL INDEPENDENCE PAYMENT: UPPER TRIBUNAL CASES 2019/20
- SOCIAL SECURITY: EMPLOYMENT: UPPER TRIBUNAL CASES 2019/20
- REPRESENTATIVE ACTIONS
- SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS AND DISABILITIES: UPPER TRIBUNAL DECISIONS
- MENTAL HEALTH: UPPER TRIBUNAL DECISIONS
- LETTINGS AGENCY: UPPER TRIBUNAL DECISIONS
- DAMAGES-BASED AGREEMENTS: THE LEXLAW CASE: COURT OF APPEAL GRANTS LEAVE TO APPEAL
- SITE OF SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC INTEREST: UPPER TRIBUNAL DECISIONS
- ARMED FORCES: UPPER TRIBUNAL DECISIONS
- INFORMATION RIGHTS: UPPER TRIBUNAL DECISIONS
- QUALIFIED ONE-WAY COSTS SHIFTING APPLIES TO CLAIMANTS, NOT PROCEEDINGS
- EMPLOYMENT: KEY CASE LAW 2019/20
- EMPLOYMENT: LEGISLATION 2019/20
- CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS: NO WIN, LOWER FEE: LUMP SUM DISCOUNTED FEE: PAYMENT OUT BY COURT IN FRAUD LITIGATION
- UPPER TRIBUNAL: SOCIAL SECURITY CASES
- FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL: TAX CHAMBER: COSTS AGAINST HMRC FOR LYING
- IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM: KEY CASES IN LAST YEAR: PART 7: CHILDREN
- IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM: KEY CASES IN LAST YEAR: PART 6: EUROPEAN UNION
- IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM: KEY CASES IN LAST YEAR: PART 5: COUNTRY GUIDANCE
- IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM: KEY CASES IN LAST YEAR: PART 4: DEPORTATION
- IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM: KEY CASES IN LAST YEAR: PART 3: EVIDENCE
- IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM: KEY CASES IN LAST YEAR: PART 2: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
- IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM: KEY CASES IN LAST YEAR: PART 1: GENERAL
- EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL : SIX IMPORTANT DECISIONS
- CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION
- SOME CIVIL AND FAMILY FEES REDUCED FROM 3 AUGUST 2020
- NO LETTER BEFORE CLAIM: WRONGLY ISSUED AS PART 8: NO STRIKE OUT
- NO COSTS FOR SOLICITOR ACTING FOR HIS OWN COMPANY: ANOTHER WRONG COSTS DECISION
- HIGH COURT SCRAPS COUNSEL’S FIXED COSTS IN EX-PORTAL CLAIMS: A VERY UNFORTUNATE DECISION
- SET-OFF OF INTERIM COSTS ORDER AGAINST JUDGMENT SUM
- GROUP LITIGATION ORDERS: GUIDANCE ON SELECTING SAMPLE CLAIMANTS
- DATA PROTECTION AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: IMPORTANT COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
- PART 36: WITHDRAWN OFFER STILL COUNTS: AN UNFORTUNATE DECISION
- COSTS CHAOS BETWEEN COURTS AND TRIBUNALS
- PROPORTIONATE COSTS ORDERS PREFERRED TO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: UPDATED: TWO NEW CASES
- PART 36: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN ONE OF A NUMBER OF DEFENDANTS ACCEPTS A PART 36 OFFER?
- PERSONAL INJURY: QOCS AND FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NEW HIGH COURT CASE
- PORTALS: PUTTING CASE ON WRONGLY: WRONGLY USING PART 8 AND NOT PART 7: NO STRIKE OUT
- DETAILED ASSESSMENT: COSTS DISALLOWED IN FULL DUE TO MISCONDUCT
- EMPLOYMENT: TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS: TWO NEW CASES
- LITIGATION FRIENDS: DUTIES AND PROCEDURE
- PROPORTIONATE COSTS ORDERS
- MY RUBBISH CASE STRUCK OUT: I WANT COSTS: 3 CRAZY CASES: 3 CORRECT DECISIONS
On this blog
- “SUCCESSFUL” CLAIMANT RECOVERS 60% OF HIS COSTS BUT PAYS THE COSTS OF TRIAL: ISSUED BASED COSTS ORDERS CONSIDERED
- CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: RECENT CASES AND THE EFFECT OF OGDEN 8: WEBINAR 9TH SEPTEMBER 2020
- WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS? IT DEPENDS: COURT CONSIDERS THE RELEVANT TEST
- RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED WHEN JUDGE HAD RESERVATIONS AS TO WHETHER STRIKING OUT ORDER SHOULD EVER HAVE BEEN MADE
- WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE BECOMES REDUNDANT: “WE DO NOT HAVE TRIAL BY EXPERT IN THIS COUNTRY: WE HAVE TRIAL BY JUDGE”
- COURT TAKES UNUSUAL “GRADATED” APPROACH AND DEFERS APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS FOR LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS – & IT COULD COST THEM $58 MILLION (I SUPPOSE THAT EVERY LITTLE HELPS…)
- PROVING THINGS 178: PROVING PREJUDICE: THE NEED FOR SPECIFIC EVIDENCE
- EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY TORTURE: THE SUPREME COURT CONSIDERS THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH WHEN TORTURE CANNOT BE PROVEN
- WHEN THE FEE EARNER WITH CONDUCT OF A MATTER IS ALSO THE SOLE DIRECTOR OF THE CLIENT: UPPER TRIBUNAL AWARDS NO COSTS FOR THIS ASPECT OF THE CASE
- COURTESY AND CORRESPONDENCE: “NOTHING WAS SAID TO ACKNOWLEDGE OR ACCEPT THE JUDGE’S CRITICISM OF THE HIGH-HANDED MANNER IN WHICH THE ASSOCIATE SOLICITOR HAD SOUGHT TO TELL THE COURT HOW THE TRIAL WAS GOING TO BE CONDUCTED”
- COUNSEL’S FEES ARE RECOVERABLE ON A CASE THAT LEAVES THE PORTAL: WHEN A TRAIL OF BREADCRUMBS LEADS NOWHERE
- CASE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF THE ABSENCE OF A LETTER BEFORE ACTION AND INCORRECT USE OF THE PART 8 PROCEDURE
- BANKRUPTCY AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LITIGANT: A REMINDER OF THE KEY POINTS
- THE NEW COSTS MANAGEMENT PRACTICE DIRECTION: COMING INTO FORCE 1ST OCTOBER 2020: READ IT HERE
- SERVING THE COURT FORM (AFTER) THE LAST MINUTE: COURTING DISASTER LEADING TO A WASTED COSTS ORDER BEING MADE
- PROVING THINGS 179: SECRETARY OF STATE’S “SUPERFICIAL INVESTIGATION” FAILS TO PROVE THAT DEFENDANT WAS A DE FACTO DIRECTOR
- 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
- SERVICE, JURISDICTION AND WASTED COSTS: A CASE TO POINT
- COSTS BUDGETING: PRECEDENT T: EXCEL VERSION
- PROVING THINGS 181: THE ART GALLERY, THE MILKMAN AND THE 1992 REGULATIONS…
- PROVING PROPENSITY AND SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY
- SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE: AN OVERVIEW AND THE CASES: THE RELEVANT GUIDANCE CONSIDERED
- EXPERT EVIDENCE UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: THE TRIAL JUDGE CANNOT OVERTURN CONCLUSIONS OF A “UNCONTROVERTED” EXPERT: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
- THE LIMITATION PERIOD, PERSONAL INJURY AND THE RESTORATION OF A COMPANY: A HIGH COURT DECISION
- LEXLAW -V- ZUBERI: PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED
- “WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NON-ADMISSION AND A DENIAL” ? A SEARCH TERM THAT COMES UP FREQUENTLY
- EXTENSION OF STAY OF POSSESSION PROCEEDING TO THE 20TH SEPTEMBER 2020
- NEWTON’S LAW AND COMMUNICATING WITH THE COURT: THE NEED FOR PARTIES TO GO THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE
- WHEN SHOULD A LITIGATION FRIEND BE LIABLE FOR COSTS? INTERESTING COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
- THE TREATMENT OF EXPERT EVIDENCE AND APPEALS: ANOTHER CASE WHERE A JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF A DEFENDANT IS OVERTURNED
- 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
