NO PROTECTIVE COSTS ORDER FOR APPELLANT IN ACCOMMODATION APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In the judgment in Swift v Carpenter [2020] EWCA Civ 165 today the Court of Appeal rejected the claimant’s application for a Protected Costs Order. There are important observations on (i) the scope of Protected Costs Orders; (ii) the exercise…
ACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES: A ROUND UP OF THE CASES AND SOME GUIDANCE (IF YOU HAVE THE TIME TO READ IT…)
In Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc & Ors v Zhunus & Ors [2020] EWHC 128 (Comm) Mr Justice Andrew Baker made some observations about inadequate time estimates. This criticism was specifically about applications in the Commercial Court. However time estimates are an…
PLEADINGS ARE IMPORTANT: NO LUCK IN TRYING TO ARGUE AN UNPLEADED CASE ON APPEAL: NOT A “DRY, TECHNICAL POINT”
In Kalma & Ors v African Minerals Ltd & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 144 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal brought by unsuccessful claimants. In the judgment it was observed that the claimants were attempting to run a case…
THE SET OFF OF COSTS AND QOCS: A HIGH COURT DECISION: THE COURT HAS A DISCRETION TO SET OFF COSTS – BUT ON THE FACTS OF THIS CASE WOULD NOT DO SO
In the judgment given this morning in Faulkner -v- Secretary of State for Energy and Industrial Strategy [2020] EWHC 296 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered the issue of whether a defendant, ordered to pay costs when failing in an application…
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH (3): THE SCARY STUFF (THE REALLY SCARY STUFF)
This is the third (and final) post in the series that examines the importance of the statement of truth. Here we look at the clear and start warnings given by the courts about the importance of the statement of truth….
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH (2): WHY LAWYERS SHOULD THINK (MORE THAN TWICE) BEFORE SIGNING IT
Given the imminent changes to the statement of truth this is a good time to consider the problems that can occur when a lawyer signs a statement of truth on behalf of their client. There are some cases that make…
THE DISCLOSURE PILOT: GUIDANCE GIVEN AS TO HOW IT SHOULD WORK: NOT A STICK WITH WHICH TO BEAT YOUR OPPONENT
There are two recent cases where the disclosure pilot is considered in detail. In McParland & Partners Ltd & Anor v Whitehead [2020] EWHC 298 (Ch) Sir Geoffrey Vos. Chancellor of the High Court set out some definitive guidance as…
UPDATED EDITION OF THE “DENTON RESOURCE”: THE CRUCIAL CASES
For a number of years the Sanctions Case Watch section of this blog has contained a link to the highly useful “Denton Resource”. A new edition has been published by Rachel Segal of St John’s Chambers and is available here….
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH (1): WHY IT NEEDED “BEEFING UP” (THE RULES COMMITTEE COULD HAVE DONE THIS FIVE YEARS AGO…)
Yesterday was, by a long way, the busiest day on this blog ever. The reason for this being that everyone is anxious to know the new wording for the statement truth. There is a need for a short series on…
MORE RULE CHANGES IN APRIL: CHANGES TO THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED…
We are returning to the 113th update to Practice Direction Amendments. This introduces important changes to to the wording of the statement of truth. (Coming into force from the 6th April 2020). THE AMENDMENT The amendment makes changes to the…
CLAIMANT’S MEDICAL EXPERT ORDERED TO PAY DEFENDANT’S COSTS: EXPERTS PLEASE NOTE (EXPERTS’ INSURERS NOTE CAREFULLY)
In Thimmaya -v- Lancashire NHS Foundation Trust (30th January 2020, Manchester County Court) HHJ Claire Evans ordered that a medical expert pay a significant part of the defendant’s costs when she found that the expert had failed in his duties…
NEW RULE CHANGES: THE RULES WILL NOW GET IT RIGHT ON PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: A SMALL CHANGE THAT TOOK FAR TOO LONG
The 113th update to Practice Direction Amendments makes a small but important change to the rules relating to mitigation of loss. In short it puts the position right and stops the Practice Direction being the shambles it was before. This…
NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE: PLEADING SPECIFIC ISSUES IN RELATION TO THE HIRE OF A REPLACEMENT VEHICLE
The 113th update to Practice Direction Amendments comes into force on the 6th April 2020. It introduces new, and quite specific, obligations on a claimant claiming the cost of a replacement hire vehicle. THE NEW RULE There is a new Paragraph…
BOOK REVIEW: GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS
I have been sent a copy of the 3rd edition of the Guide to Catastrophic Injury Claims by Stuart McKechnie QC and others. I can review it briefly. This is a book that needs to be on your shelf if…
FIXED COSTS OUSTED BY AGREEMENT: INSURER HAS TO STAND BY THE DEAL IT STRUCK
I am grateful to barrister Andrew Roy for sending me a copy of the decision of District Judge Baldwin (sitting as a Regional Costs Judge) in Turner -v- Cole (16th December 2019). It is a case where the judge held…
WITNESS STATEMENT SERVED 28 DAYS LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: ACTION STRUCK OUT: THE PERILS OF DELIBERATELY NOT COMPLYING WITH DIRECTIONS
I am grateful to barrister Andrew Worthley for drawing my attention to, and sending me a note of the decision in Syed -v- Shah [2020] 2 WLUK 15 where Trower J upheld a decision not to grant a claimant relief…
FIRST CLAIM FORM CASE OF THE YEAR: SERVICE WITHOUT A SEAL IS NOT GOOD SERVICE BUT CPR 3.10 SAVED THE CLAIMANT
NB THE USE OF CPR 3.10 IS MOST PROBABLY NOT AN EFFECTIVE STRATEGY FOLLOWING THE COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT IN Ideal Shopping Direct Ltd & Ors v Mastercard Incorporated & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 14. It took until the 31st January…
A WITNESS STATEMENT “SIGNED OFF ON, WITH INSUFFICIENT CONSIDERATION AND SCRUTINY”
Lawyers are always, one would hope, telling clients and witnesses to read draft witness statements with care prior to signing them. An example of the problems that a failure to consider the matter in detail can be seen in the…
PROVING THINGS 174: ILLEGALITY, THE VAN DRIVER AND THE MOT CERTIFICATE: CLAIMANT STILL ENTITLED TO DAMAGES
I am grateful to Liam Davidson, from Winns Solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Freedman in Jack -v- Borys (Newcastle upon Tyne 20th December 2019). It relates to damages and illegality. Jack-v-Borys-2019 (1) “I think…
MARGARET THATCHER, BETAMAX VIDEOS, THE MACARENA AND CIVIL PROCEDURE (ECHOES OF COMPLAINTS FROM “DOWN UNDER”)
The judgment of Lord Justice Coulson in Lejonvarn v Burgess & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 114 commenting on a case “with echoes of the bad old days” shares some sentiments with the judgment of Lee J in the Federal Court of…
THE DANGERS OF MAKING ORDERS FOR SPLIT TRIALS: DECISION AT TRIAL SET ASIDE DUE TO A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY
The judgment of Mr Justice Murray today in Sharn Panesar Ltd v Pistachios In The Park Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 194 (QB) illustrates some of the dangers of holding a trial on a preliminary issue. In this case a…
INDEMNITY COSTS ON THE GROUNDS OF CONDUCT: FAILURE TO BEAT A DEFENDANT’S PART 36 OFFER: A GARDEN THAT GETS MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE…
The Court of Appeal decision in Lejonvarn v Burgess & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 114 is the second time this case, about a garden, has been on appeal. On this occasion the Court of Appeal held that the claimants’ conduct…
LUTON COUNTY COURT IS MOVING: BEAR THAT IN MIND OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS (AND AFTER THAT…)
It is difficult to describe the feeling when you turn up at a court that you have been going through for many years and it isn’t there. It happened to me years ago when York County Court moved from one…
“GOOD DAYS AND BAD DAYS”: FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AT TRIAL – AN EXAMPLE
Last month I reviewed the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Grant -v- Newport City Council [2018] EWHC 3813. In that case the judge allowed the defendant to adduce surveillance evidence, even though it was adduced late. I am grateful to Mark…
JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT – AFTER DEFENCE IS DUE BUT WHEN DEFENCE IS FILED LATE: ISSUE TO BE DETERMINED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
An earlier post dealt with rule changes that come into force in April in relation to default judgment being entered. The new rules make it clear that judgment cannot be entered if the court has received an acknowledgement of service…
NEW RULES ON ENTERING A DEFAULT JUDGMENT WHERE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE OR DEFENCE IS FILED LATE
We have looked several times at the cases (sometimes conflicting cases) about whether a defence can be filed late. In some cases it has been held that a claimant faced with a late defence can enter default judgment even when…
LATE COSTS BUDGET: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED: DEFENDANT DROPPED THE BALL BUT THIS WAS FORGIVABLE
In Manchester Shipping Ltd v Balfour Shipping Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 164 (Comm) Lionel Persey QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) granted relief from sanctions to a defendant who had filed a costs budget late. The case…
WITNESS STATEMENTS, WITNESS EVIDENCE AND SELF-PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER
Every few years I repeat advice given in relation to the need for “self-protection” when drafting witness statements. This is often caused by something I have seen in practice, questions I am asked, or a transcript of a case. The…
BILL OF COSTS STRUCK OUT IN FIXED COSTS CASE: CPR 36.20(11) GIVES RISE TO A “DIFFERENT, SELF-CONTAINED PROCEDURE” FOR DISPUTES AS TO DISBURSEMENTS
In Nema v Kirkland [2019] EWHC B15 (Costs) Master Leonard struck out a claimant’s bill of costs on the grounds that the action was subject to the fixed costs regime and an assessment should never have been sought. The rules…
STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 9: SHARING THE “PAIN”
Most of the burden of complying with time periods and court orders lies with the solicitor. However a solicitor’s life can be made easier by making sure that all those concerned with the litigation process know of the deadlines involved…
GDPR AND THE CIVIL LITIGATOR (1) : USEFUL LINKS FOR LITIGATORS
The post earlier this week that highlighted the fact that an applicant had spent £40,000 unsuccessfully trying to obtain documents that would have been freely available under GDPR has led me to contemplate a series of articles on litigators and…
SEEKING FURTHER DISCLOSURE: DON’T GO IMPORTING STONES FROM A NEIGHBOURING QUARRY: DISCLOSURE PILOT PREVAILS
In Maher v Maher & Anor [2019] EWHC 3613 (Ch) HHJ Hodge (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused an application for disclosure. There are a number of important points here, including the need for an application for further disclosure to…
THE COSTS OF PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: IS IT WORTH THE RISK? £40,000 SPENT IN COSTS FOR DOCUMENTS THAT WERE AVAILABLE UNDER GDPR
I am looking again at the decision in Hussain v Medical Defence Union & Anor [2020] EWHC 157 (QB). This time I am looking at the order in relation to costs. The application cost in excess of £40,000 in relation to…
APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: COURT’S DISCRETION EXERCISED AGAINST THE APPLICANT
In Hussain v Medical Defence Union & Anor [2020] EWHC 157 (QB) Clive Sheldon QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused an application for pre-action disclosure. This judgment makes it clear that pre-action disclosure is, ultimately, a matter of…
PROVING THINGS 173: FAILING TO PROVE ANY KIND OF PAST OR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS: A BLAMIRE AWARD IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR EVIDENCE
There is another aspect of the judgment of Mr Justice Chamberlain in BXB v Watch Tower And Bible Tract Society of Pennsylvannia & Anor [2020] EWHC 156 (QB) that merits attention. Th claimant sought damage for loss of earnings but these…
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 33 SUCCEEDS MORE THAN 24 YEARS AFTER EXPIRY OF LIMITATION PERIOD
In BXB v Watch Tower And Bible Tract Society of Pennsylvannia & Anor [2020] EWHC 156 (QB) Mr Justice Chamberlain allowed the claimant’s application under Section 33 of the Limitation Act in a case that was issued more than 24…
CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – JANUARY 2020
Links and articles to blog posts and articles available online in January 2020 Costs Costs Barrister Conditional fee agreements and contentious business agreements Association for Costs Lawyers Oversight regulator praises CLSB’s “considerable progress” Association for Costs Lawyers Offer acceptanc… Enjoying this post? Become…
PROVING THINGS 172: SPECULATION BY THE DEFENDANT IS NOT EVIDENCE: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE
The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Morrison v Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 91 (QB) is another illustration of a party asserting something but having no evidence to support it. This time it was a defendant whose…
JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES IN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 2: THE PRINCIPLES (AND THE COSTS!)
We are looking again at the decision of HHJ Kimbell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Molavi v Hibbert & Ors [2020] EWHC, this time relating to the principles to be considered in relation to joinder of additional parties….
JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES INTO EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 1: NOTIFY THE EXISTING PARTIES: THE RULES DON’T SAY SO BUT COMMON SENSE DOES
There are a few interesting procedural matters that flow from the decision of HHJ Kimbell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Molavi v Hibbert & Ors [2020] EWHC 121 (Ch). Here we look at the judge’s comments on…
A BAD DAY IN COURT FOR THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS: COMPLICATED, OH SO COMPLICATED CFA AGREEMENTS: BREACHES OF THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE AND MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT: AGREEMENTS “SO DARKLY PENNED AS TO BE INCOMPREHENSIBLE”
The judgment of Deputy Master Friston in Anthony v Collins [2020] EWHC B14 (Costs) makes for interesting reading. A highly complex series of conditional fee agreements were held to be in breach of the indemnity principle. There are important lessons…
BOOK LAUNCH: 27th FEBRUARY 2020 – 5 PARK SQUARE, LEEDS
On the 27th February 2020 Kings Chambers in Leeds is holding a book launch to mark the publishing of Munkman and Exall on Damages, 14th edition. We would like to invite all readers of this blog (at home and abroad). …
SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER: WEBINAR 31st MARCH 2020
On the 31st March I am giving a webinar on Social Media and the Personal Injury Lawyer. This webinar looks at two things in detail (i) The ways in which PI lawyers can use social media as a resource to…
JUDGMENT MUST GIVE REASONS (AND NOT SIMPLY INCORPORATE A SKELETON ARGUMENT): THE BAKERS CAN CHALLENGE THEIR ELECTRICITY BILL
In Fine Lady Bakeries Ltd v EDF Energy Customers Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 87 (QB) Mrs Justice Farbey allowed an appeal against a Deputy District Judge who had granted summary judgment. The case emphasises the need for a judge…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: THE AWARD SHOULD BE THE SAME: IT DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE RICH OR POOR
The Privy Council decision in Attorney General of St Helena v AB & Ors (St Helena) [2020] UKPC 1 is of considerable interest to personal injury practitioners. Issues relating to awards made for pain and suffering are rarely discussed at…
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: “WAREHOUSING” A CLAIM IS NOT AN ALWAYS ABUSE OF PROCESS (AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT IN ANY EVENT)
In the judgment today in Alibrahim v Asturion Fondation [2020] EWCA Civ 32 the Court of Appeal confirmed that the court should not have struck out a claim that had been left dormant for a period. “Striking out was a…
REDACTING DOCUMENTS: MAY CAUSE ENQUIRIES TO BE MADE AND EXPLANATIONS MAY NEED TO BE GIVEN
One other aspect of the judgment of HHJ Lethem in Ivanoy -v- Lubble (Central London County Court 17th January 2020) is in the orders made after the judgment. It concerns the redaction of documents. THE CASE The primary issue in the…
DISCLOSURE OF SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE LATE: THE FACT THAT THE GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE IS NOT ENOUGH: AN INTERESTING HIGH COURT DECISION
Angus Fergusson has kindly sent me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Grant -v- Newport City Council [2018] EWHC 3813, it is an interesting case where the judge, on appeal, upheld a decision to refuse…
A DECISION THAT WAS “UNJUST BECAUSE OF SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY AND MULTIPLE ERRORS OF LAW”: WHEN DECISIONS ARE NOT BASED ON THE EVIDENCE
I have hesitated before writing about the judgment in H v F [2020] EWHC 86 (Fam). The judgment reviews a highly disturbing first instance decision. I know that many family law commentators have already commented on the case and I…
FAILING TO TURN UP TO A TRIAL: DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION REFUSED: CPR 39.3(3) CONSIDERED
This blog has looked several times at the issues relating to CPR 39.3(3), the rule that governs an application when a party fails to attend a trial or hearing. The rule was considered by Mrs Justice Lambert in KD v…
You must be logged in to post a comment.