PERSONAL INJURY COSTS 2021: WATCH THE “SAINT AND GREAVSIE” OF THE COSTS BAR
My colleagues Craig Ralph and Andrew Hogan have delivered a webinar “Personal Injury Costs 2021” which is now available on the Kings Chambers website. THE WEBINAR The webinar takes you through the hot topics relating to personal injury costs. …
FROM TODAY I AM AN ASSOCIATE TENANT AT 4-5 GRAY’S INN SQUARE
I am delighted to report that from today I have become an associate tenant at 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square. THE ANNOUNCEMENT “A huge welcome to Gordon Exall who joins 4-5 as an Associate Tenant. He brings first class expertise…
WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERT COURTS: GESTMIN PRINCIPLES NOW ENSHRINED IN THE RULES
From the 6th April this year some of the key principles from the judgment in Gestmin SGPS S.A. -v- Credit Suisse [2013] EWCA 3560 (Comm) are effectively enshrined into the rules. Key parts of the Gestmin principles are included in the Appendix to…
EXPERT WITNESSES & CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION TO ERASE DOCTOR FROM RECORD BECAUSE OF HIS CONDUCT AS AN EXPERT WITNESS
Every litigator and, particularly, every expert witness should have a very close read of the judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in Bux v The General Medical Council [2021] EWHC 762. Although it is a decision in the administrative court it…
WHEN A SOLICITOR SIGNS A STATEMENT OF TRUTH ON BEHALF OF A CLIENT: GET THE WORDING RIGHT (AND REMEMBER WHAT IT IS YOU ARE CERTIFYING)
A regular search term that leads people to this blog is “can a solicitor sign a statement of truth on behalf of a client?” The answer is yes, for some documents at least. The lawyer has to remember (i) what…
THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE AND CPR CANNOT BE USED TO OVERRIDE THE REQUIREMENT THAT CASES BE DEALT WITH “JUSTLY”: HIGH COURT DECISION
The judgment of Mr Justice Lane in Ibrahim v London Borough of Haringey & Anor [2021] EWHC 731 shows an unsuccessful attempt to argue that the “overriding objective” justified a preliminary finding made after the court did not hear evidence….
CONSTRUING REGULATIONS AFTER BREXIT: COURT OF APPEAL GUIDANCE: THE CASE OF THE ABSENT PILOT
I am grateful to my colleague Michael Rawlinson QC for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgment in Lipton -v- BA City Flyer Limited [2021] EWCA Civ 454. The judgment of Lord Justice Green contains a comprehensive…
CHILDREN AND LIMITATION IN FATAL ACCIDENTS: LIMITATION AND THE DEATH OF CHILDREN
The law of limitation for Fatal Accidents Act claims for children is often misunderstood. Here we look at the limitation period in relation to fatal accident claims and children. There are two issues: the limitation period when any of…
DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 5th APRIL: THE QUESTIONS YOU ASK WILL DETERMINE THE ANSWERS YOU GET
This blog has looked in detail at the rule changes coming into force early next month. In particular there is a need for the whole process of taking witness statements to be transparent. Lawyers are enjoined not to ask leading…
“POSSIBLE CRIMINAL ACTIONS THAT MAY HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN THIS CASE INCLUDE PERJURY, CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD AND CONSPIRACY TO PERVERT THE COURT OF JUSTICE”: THE NON-EXISTENT TRIP TO ILKLEY
The judgment of HH Judge Davis-White QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in The British University in Dubai v Ebrahimi [2021] EWHC 757 (Ch) contains clear findings of fact in relation to three witnesses. Among the matters of interest…
LIMITATION AND EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS: CLAIMANT DID NOT HAVE ACTUAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE & ACTION ISSUED WITHIN TIME
In Balls v Reeve & Anor [2021] EWHC 751 (QB) David Pittaway QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) found that the claimant’s date of knowledge was not more than three years prior to issue. THE CASE…
A CAP OF 25% ON COSTS TO BE DEDUCTED FROM DAMAGES GIVES RISE TO PRESUMPTION OF INFORMED CONSENT FROM CLIENT
The Law Society Gazette carries a report of the decision of Regional Costs Judge Rouine in Swann -v- Slater & Gordon. The judge decided that the existence of a cap on costs liability of 25% indicated that a claimant/client had…
“WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A WITNESS STATEMENT AND SUBSTANTIVE SUBMISSIONS”
The title of this piece is a search term that led someone to this blog today. Again it caused me to repeat a point made several years ago on this blog. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS In a…
MORE ON WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG: GOOD ADVICE IN TIMES OF STRESS AND PANIC
The Law Society Gazette today has an article by John Hyde “Prosecute the firms that force junior solicitors to cover up mistakes”. The central thrust of the argument is that there has to be a duty on firms employing lawyers…
“THE OPTIMUM CASELOAD”: WHY YOU SHOULD READ AN ARTICLE ABOUT IT?
Workload is likely to be the main source of stress for most litigators. The very basic issue of what is an appropriate caseload for litigators is often complained about but rarely analysed. Here we look at one sensible, and wholly…
WITNESS STATEMENTS THE TIMES WILL SOON BE CHANGING: “A SOMEWHAT OVERLAWYERED DOCUMENT”: “A LOT OF COMMENT THAT IS INADMISSIBLE”
The judgment of John Kimbell QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in One Blackfriars Ltd, Re [2021] EWHC 684 (Ch) provides a reminder as to why the strictures as to witness statements are being tightened next month. “It…
MAKING MISTAKES AS A YOUNG LAWYER: HELPFUL GUIDANCE – WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM MY FRIENDS…
The post yesterday on making mistakes as a young lawyer got a lot of attention and comment. For that reason I have decided to re-post something on the same vein. This post is based on guidance given on Twitter in…
MAKING MISTAKES AS A YOUNG LAWYER (INDEED A LAWYER OF ANY AGE): LEARNING HOW TO CRASH LAND
There have been reports today of an overturning of an SRA decision, with remission back to the SDT, of a case of a young solicitor who made the mistake of leaving documents on a train. The real issue came with…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: KEEPING DRAFTS AND “THE SHREWSBURY 24”: LESSONS FROM PAST MISTAKES
It may seem strange to link the highly important Court of Appeal decision in Warren & Ors v R. [2021] EWCA Crim 413 with modern civil litigation. However this is an important case and there are direct parallels to many…
COURT ALLOWS ASSESSMENT OF SOLICITOR’S BILLS OUTSIDE 12 MONTHS: PUBLIC SPIRITED LITIGATION DOES NOT AMOUNT TO SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
I am grateful to Mark Carlisle for sending me a copy of the judgment of Master Brown in Erlam -v- Edmonds Marshall McMahon Limited (SCCO – 19th November 2020 – a copy available here Erlam v Edmonds Marshall McMahon Ltd…
BARRISTER SUES FOR FEES: COURT STRIKES OUT SOLICITOR’S DEFENCE: BARRISTER OWES NO DUTY OF CARE TO SOLICITOR
In McFarland-Cruickshanks v England Kerr Hands Solicitors Ltd [2021] EWHC 525 (Comm) HHK Worster (sitting as a High Court Judge) granted an application to strike out the defence and counterclaim and for summary judgment. The claimant was a barrister suing…
WEBINAR SERIES ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: STARTING JUNE 2021
In June this year I am presenting a series of six webinars which deal with major aspects of a claim for damages for personal injury. This series goes through each major element of a claim for damages, looking at…
WHY, IF YOU PRACTICE IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS, YOU HAVE TO LEARN TO ASK NON-LEADING QUESTIONS…
It is difficult to understate the depth and breadth of the new rules coming into force on the 6th April in the BPC. One good example is the fact that the person taking a witness statement has got to learn…
COSTS, CONDUCT AND ASSESSMENT ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: £2 MILLION SPENT TO RECOVER £40,666.47
An earlier post looked at the construction of the Part 36 offer in Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 653 (Ch) Andrew Lenon Q.C. (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division). Here we look at…
AMBIGUITY AS TO DATE DID NOT INVALIDATE A PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 653 (Ch) Andrew Lenon Q.C. (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) rejected the defendants’ arguments that an ambiguity as to the date meant that a Part…
SEDLEY’S LAW GOES ONLINE… : “IT IS NECESSARY FOR ME TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE UNSATISFACTORY MANNER IN WHICH BUNDLES OF DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN PREPARED FOR TRIAL”
If you thought that electronic bundles were the panacea that was going to put an end to the numerous posts on this blog recording (largely) judicial criticisms of bundles, think again. The judgment today of HHJ Cawson QC, sitting as…
DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT THE CLAIMANT DISCLOSED BY MISTAKE: HIGH COURT RULING
In Barclay-Watt & Ors v Alpha Panareti Public Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 642 (Comm) Sir Michael Burton (sitting as a High Court Judge) granted a defendants’ application to rely on witness statements mistakenly disclosed by the claimant. “The…
CLAIMANT WHO GAVE MISLEADING ACCOUNT OF HER INJURIES FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST
In Smith v London Borough of Haringey [2021] EWHC 615 (QB) Master David Cook found a claimant to be fundamentally dishonest. A failure to disclose previous back problems, coupled with an exaggeration of her medical condition was found to be…
CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER TO ACCEPT 90% OF DAMAGES NOT EFFECTIVE WHEN CAUSATION IS IN ISSUE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In the judgment today in Seabrook v Adam [2021] EWCA Civ 382 the Court of Appeal considered when a Part 36 offer to accept a reduced percentage on liability was effective when only causation was in dispute. It was held…
PROVING THINGS 207: CORPORATE INSOLVENCY AND CORONAVIRUS: A COMPANY STILL HAS TO PROVE SOLVENCY PROBLEMS WERE DUE TO COVID
In PGH Investments Ltd v Ewing [2021] EWHC 533 (Ch) Deputy ICC Judge Passfield considered questions of evidence in relation to the provisions that prevent winding up of a company when it can establish that its financial state is due…
DEFENDANT REQUIRES RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN THERE WAS £92 MILLION AT STAKE: DENTON CONSIDERED AND APPLIED
When I wrote earlier about the decision in Various Claimants v G4S Plc [2021] EWHC 524 (Ch) I noted that it required more than one post. Here we look at the judge’s decision in relation to relief from sanctions. Relief was…
“THIS APPLICATION WAS A SIGNIFICANT ABUSE OF THE PROCEDURES … AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE”: THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT, DUTIES TO THE COURT AND THE HAMID JURISDICTION
In the judgment today in DVP & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 606 (Admin) the Administrative Court exercised considered a case referred to it under the “Hamid” jurisdiction…
NO PUBLIC FUNDING FOR PARENTS WHEN THE LIFE OF THEIR CHILD IS BEING CONSIDERED BY THE COURT: A DECISION THAT HIGHLIGHTS A MAJOR ISSUE
There judgment in the heartbreaking case of The NHS Trust v The Parents & S [2021] EWHC 594 (Fam) raises many issues. Here I want to highlight one aspect of legal funding , (along with pointing to the magnificent steps…
EXAGGERATING AND INFLATING CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIM LED TO CLAIMANT BEING SENTENCED TO SIX MONTHS IMPRISONMENT: “THERE IS NO ROBIN HOOD DEFENCE HERE”
In Calderdale & Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust v Metcalf [2021] EWHC 611 (QB) Mr Justice Griffiths sentenced a claimant to six months imprisonment following the exaggeration of a claim for damages. “She was, by her contempt of court, effectively stealing…
SOLICITORS AND ATTENDANCE NOTES: JUDGES NEARLY ALWAYS PREFER THE CONTEMPORANEOUS NOTES
The judgment of HHK Keyser QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Mundil-Williams v Williams & Ors [2021] EWHC 586 (Ch) serves as a reminder of the importance of contemporary attendance notes as a source of evidence. “the best…
JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIMS OF CLAIMANTS JOINED INTO ACTION AFTER CLAIM FORM WAS ISSUED: WHEN AMENDED PLEADINGS START TO RESEMBLE A RAINBOW
The case of Various Claimants v G4S Plc [2021] EWHC 524 (Ch)is one that bristles with procedural issues. Here we look at one issue – the judge striking out the claimants that were added after issue of the claim form…
HOUSING POSSESSION DUTY DESK: SIMON MULLINGS AND SUE JAMES: “SO MUCH MORE THAN” A PRACTICAL GUIDE
If there is a “front line” of the legal world a large part of it has to be the housing possession duty desk. A lawyer, with no previous knowledge of the case, is called upon to try to save the…
THE NEW RULES ON WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS: WHY THE IRON FIST? BASICALLY – THE PROFESSION HAD IT COMING
As anyone practising in the BPC is just about to discover the rules on witness statements coming into force next month are highly prescriptive, even covering the way in which questions are to be asked to witnesses. Further it has…
ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WEBINAR 11th MAY 2021
I am co-presenting a webinar with solicitor John McQuater on fundamental dishonesty in personal injury action on the 11th May 2021. HOW TO BOOK Details of how to book are available here. THE WEBINAR This webinar will bring you right…
WHEN JUDGE READS A DRAFT STATEMENT AND A FINAL STATEMENT (& THERE ARE SOME IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES): LITIGANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EVIDENCE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN BEFORE THE COURT AT THE ORIGINAL HEARING
The judgment of Mr Justice Francis in Brack v Brack [2020] EWHC 2142 (Fam) is an example of a case where the judge has the opportunity to see a draft statement and a final statement. The judge struck out an…
THE FOREIGN LIMITATION PERIOD: ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, PUBLIC POLICY – AND A BASIC ERROR ABOUT THE DATE: CLAIMANT HAS TO FALL BACK ON “UNDUE HARDSHIP” ARGUMENT
The Court of Appeal decision in Begum v Maran (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 326 contains some interesting observations on the law of tort and duty of care. However the claimant in this case faces another fundamental challenge. There is…
SANCTIONS FOR LATE FAILURE TO FILE A COSTS BUDGET DO NOT APPLY TO INCURRED COSTS: REPORT OF A COUNTY COURT DECISION
Recommended reading today is a useful report from PIC available here in relation to a decision in Hardy -v- Skeelis (4th March 2021, County Court at Stoke, HHJ Rawlings). The appeal decision confirms that the sanctions imposed for failing to…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: 12 THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW TO AVOID “DICING WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH”
Service of the claim form remains a continual source of problems for litigators. Issues relating to service of the claim form are often described as “dicing with procedural death”. I am here mainly repeating an earlier post on this issue…
COURT CAN COMPEL SOLICITOR TO ATTEND COURT TO EXPLAIN THEMSELVES (THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL)
NB THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL, SEE THE DECISION AT Hunt v Annolight Ltd & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1663 The decision of Mr Justice Saini in Hunt Annolight Ltd & Ors [2020] EWHC 3744 (QB) has just arrived on…
LAWYERS (AND ALL LITIGANTS) REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT WRITE TO THE COURT WITHOUT COPYING IN THE PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION
For the second time in two days I am writing of a case where a party has written to the court unilaterally, without copying in the other parties. It was a matter raised in the judgment of Mr Justice Fordham…
JUDGE REFUSES TO VARY THE TERMS OF ORIGINAL ORDER: DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION DID NOT FLY
In Walton Family Estates Ltd & Ors v GID Services Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 464 (Comm) Andrew Hochhauser QC, sitting as a judge of the High Court, refused a defendant’s application to reconsider the terms of an earlier order. …
A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO QOCS PROTECTION: THAT WAS NOT WHAT THE JACKSON REFORM WERE FOR…
I am grateful to barrister Stephen Elphick for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Gargan in Sutcliffe -v- Ali (County Court at Middlesbrough 15th January 2021). It is a case that deals with the issue of whether…
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDERS ARE NOT WRITTEN IN STONE: COURT SHOULD NOT BE “STUCK IN THE RAILS”: MASTER COULD VARY ORDER OF PREVIOUS MASTER
In Oyston & Anor v Rubin & Anor [2021] EWHC 448 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles considered arguments in relation to whether a Master was entitled to vary a previous order made by a different Master. The judge emphasised that case…
APPEAL ALLOWED WHERE THE TRIAL JUDGE DEPARTED FROM THE PLEADED CASE: “A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE JUDGE’S FUNCTION)
The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Satyam Enterprises Ltd v Burton & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 287 provides another example of the importance of statements of case. The Court allowed an appeal where the trial judge had…
PROVING THINGS 206: THE EMPLOYERS LIABILITY (DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT) ACT 1969 IN ACTION
I am grateful to Martin McKenna from Aegis solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of DDJ Morgan MBE in Johnson -v- National Platforms Ltd (a copy of which is available here Johnson v Nationwide Platforms Limited (Final))….
You must be logged in to post a comment.