INTERIM PAYMENTS: THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS CONSIDERED BY THE COURTS
Later today I am presenting a webinar on interim payments. It is difficult, if not impossible, to discuss all possible permutations in relation to interim payments during a one hour slot and this post supplements the webinar. Here we look…
INTERIM PAYMENTS WHEN THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DEFENDANTS: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
I am grateful to barrister Michael Lemmy for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgment today in Buttar Construction Ltd -v- Arshdeep [2021] EWCA Civ 1408. The Court considered arguments about whether an interim payment should have…
PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE CANNOT BE A FISHING EXPEDITION: A JUDGE WILL NOT DO THE PRUNING FOR AN APPLICANT
The judgment of Deputy Master Brightwell in Willow Sports Ltd v Sportslocker24.com Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 2524 (Ch) is a reminder of how difficult it can be to obtain pre-action disclosure, particularly in commercial cases. It is also a…
BUDGETED COSTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY THE LOWEST COSTS ( & THE COURT SHOULD ADOPT A CAUTIOUS APPROACH TO MAKING COMMENTS IN RELATION TO INCURRED COSTS): HIGH COURT DECISION
In Discovery Land Company, LLC & Ors v Axis Specialty Europe SE [2021] EWHC 2146 (Comm) Peter MacDonald Eggers QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) set out some of the principles relating to costs budgeting, in…
MISSING WITNESSES: THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IT IS REALLY A MATTER OF COMMON SENSE
This blog has looked, many times, at the inferences that courts draw when witnesses do not give evidence at court. In Royal Mail Group Ltd v Efobi [2021] UKSC 33 the Supreme Court made it clear that the principles involved…
EXPERTS GIVING EVIDENCE IS “NOT A GAME”: £1.4 MILLION VALUATION FOUND TO BE £3,230
Another interesting part of the judgment of ICC Judge Barber in CSB 123 Ltd, Re [2021] EWHC 2506 (Ch) is the judge’s findings in relation to the expert evidence. It is rare for a judge to state to an expert witness…
LITIGATION, DELAY AND THE DOCTRINE OF LACHES: IT WOULD BE “UNCONSCIONABLE FOR THE COURT TO GRANT THE APPLICANT ANY RELIEF”
The judgment of ICC Judge Barber in CSB 123 Ltd, Re [2021] EWHC 2506 (Ch)is interesting for a large number of reasons. Not least the total failure of the applicant to establish major (if not all) parts of its case,…
PEREMEPTORY ORDERS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 2: MAKING CONCESSIONS AND PUTTING ALL YOUR EGGS IN ONE BASKET
There are twp other aspects of the Court of Appeal judgment in Poule Securities Ltd v Howe & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1373 that merit consideration. Firstly the claimant’s decision to make one application; the second related to concessions made…
CONSTRUING PEREMPTORY ORDERS: THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE IS THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Poule Securities Ltd v Howe & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1373 the Court of Appeal considered the construction of an “unless” order. It was held that the date for compliance on the order had to be construed as the…
SERVING PROCEEDINGS ON “PERSONS UNKNOWN”: AN ONGOING ISSUE – WITH NO EASY ANSWER
In the course of his judgment in The London Borough of Hackney v Grant& Ors [2021] EWHC 2548 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender considered the issue of service on persons unknown. WEBINAR ON SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM On the 24th…
WHEN A BARRISTER IS CALLED TO GIVE EVIDENCE AS TO WHAT HAPPENED AT (OR OUTSIDE) COURT: PRIVILEGE IN DRAFT WITNESS STATEMENT WAIVED AS A RESULT OF IT BEING SHOWN TO COUNSEL
In Axnoller Events Ltd v Brake & Anor (cross-examination on a draft witness statement) [2021] EWHC 2539 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews considered the unusual circumstances whereby a barrister gave evidence, and was cross-examined, on what happened at (or outside) a…
CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO PURSUE POINTLESS COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: “THE DISPROPORTIONATE PURSUIT OF POINTLESS LITIGATION IS AN ABUSE”
In Pharmagona Ltd v Taheri & Anor [2021] EWHC 2537 (Ch) Mr Justice Snowden refused an application by a claimant to issue an application for committal. A breach, if established, would be of the most technical kind. Further the defendants…
RUDE CORRESPONDENCE: A RECAP: JUST REMEMBER WHAT YOU WRITE COULD END UP ON A BLOG SOME DAY (FOR THE WHOLE WORLD TO SEE…)
Several search terms that led people to this blog today related to the “arrogant tone of solicitor correspondence”. This seems like a good time to recap on Guidance and case law where, shall we say “assertive” correspondence has been considered…
JUDGE WAS WRONG TO ALLOCATE ACTION TO SMALL CLAIMS TRACK: CLAIMANT SUCCEEDS IN APPEAL AND CASE ALLOCATED TO THE FAST TRACK
In Elias & Anor v Blemain Finance Ltd [2021] EW Misc 15 (CC) HHJ Keyser QC overturned a decision allocation an action to the small claims track. The matter was re-allocated to the fast track. “… it seems to me…
JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO ORDER DEFENDANT TO FACE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION
There is another aspect of the judgment in Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) that needs consideration. The judgment on fundamental dishonesty was considered in the previous post. The defendant was unsuccessful in their appeal against the…
EXAGGERATION OF INJURIES IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) Mr Justice Jacobs rejected an appeal from a defendant that argued the trial judge should have found a claimant to be fundamentally dishonest. “The Defendant’s argument, based on the word…
ANOTHER ROUND IN A LONG-RUNNING SOLICITOR-CLIENT COSTS DISPUTE: JUDGE REFUSES APPLICATION FOR A STAY AND FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS.
In Edwards & Ors v Slater & Gordon UK Ltd [2021] EWHC B19 (Costs) Costs Judge Rowley considered several procedural issues in relation to ongoing solicitor and own-client assessments. THE CASE Some 134 cases are being brought by Clear Legal…
SUING AN IMPECUNIOUS DEFENDANT IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S INSURANCE POLICY…
Every couple of years I repost the second post ever on this blog -“suing the man of straw”. The points made remain a surprise to many. An injured claimant may be able to recover unpaid damages from their own insurer….
SERIES OF WEBINARS ON CIVIL EVIDENCE: COMING TO YOUR SCREENS SOON
Now that the nights are drawing in people’s thoughts will, almost invariably, be drawn towards matters of civil evidence and the need to prove things. To cater for this I am presenting six webinars , covering key aspects of civil…
SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: IMPORTANT POINTS TO WATCH: “A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY”
We have seen many cases in relation to late service of the claim form. Different rules, and assumptions, apply to the particulars of claim. Over the years there have been many cases where service of the Particulars has caused…
A TOMLIN ORDER CAN BE ENFORCED IN THE ORIGINAL ACTION
In Trebisol Sud Ouest SAS & Anor v Berkley Finance Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2494 (QB) Charles Morrison (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered the issue of whether the terms of Tomlin Order are enforceable within the…
CHILD PEDESTRIAN WAS NOT CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENT: HIGH COURT DECISION
In A (a minor) by her litigation friend FA -v- Akram [2021] EWHC 2467 (QB), 2021 WL 04111024 HHJ Bird (sitting as a High Court judge) rejected an argument that a nine year old child had been contributory negligent. It…
WHEN A CLAIMANT’S SOLICITOR WAS “SURPRISED” ABOUT THE RULES RELATING TO SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM (THIS DIDN’T END WELL)
A number of people have kindly written to point out that issues relating to service of the claim form are in the news at the moment. The subject may have an interest beyond those of us involved in civil procedure. …
DISCUSSIONS TO SELL LAND WERE WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND COULD NOT BE RELIED UPON AT HEARING: THE WITHOUT PREJUDICE RULE EXAMINED
In Windmill Holdings SPV Ltd v Adams & Anor (LAND REGISTRATION – ADVERSE POSSESSION – evidence) [2021] UKUT 228 (LC) The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), Judge Elizabeth Cooke, upheld the decision of the First-tier tribunal excluding certain evidence on the…
WHEN IS PERSONAL SERVICE EFFECTED? A CASE THAT REVIEWED THE PRINCIPLES
Since issues relating to personal service of proceedings are in the news this may a good time to review the principles. In Tseitline -v- Mikhelson [2015] EWHC 3065 (Comm) Mr Justice Phillips reviewed the rules as to whether effective personal…
SECTION 33 CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: TRIAL JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO EXERCISE THEIR DISCRETION
In Blackpool Football Club Ltd v DSN [2021] EWCA Civ 1352 the Court of Appeal considered, and upheld, a decision on Section 33 where the discretion was exercised in favour of the claimant. This was in the context, however, of…
DIDN’T FILE A SCHEDULE: COSTS CONFINED TO COUNSEL’S FEES
In Mahandru v Nielson [2021] EWHC 2297 (QB) Mrs Justice Steyn DBE considered what costs should be awarded when a respondent had successfully defended an appeal but not filed a costs schedule. The answer, in that case, was to simply…
NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1ST OCTOBER 3: PERMISSION TO APPEAL FROM FIRST INSTANCE JUDGEAFTER ADJOURNMENT
The rules currently provide that application for permission to appeal to the judge who made the decision must be made to the lower court at the hearing at which the decision to be appealed was made. If an application is…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED AFTER A NINE YEAR DELAY
In Francis v F Berndes Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2350 (Ch) Deputy Master Linwood dismissed the claimant’s application to resurrect an application to amend which had been made nine years previously. THE CASE The claimant brought an action…
NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1ST OCTOBER 2: PROHIBITION ON RECORDING IN COURT EXTENDED BEYOND “TAPE RECORDERS”
Another amendment introduced by The Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 4) Rules 2021 is an addition to the definition section of CPR Part 2 to make it clear that the prohibition on “tape recording” extends to any other device that can be…
NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1ST OCTOBER 1: VOLUNTARY INTERIM PAYMENTS TO CHILDREN AND PROTECTED PARTIES
There is a new batch of rules coming into force on the 1st October 2021, introduced by The Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 4) Rules 2021. Here we look at the rules relating to interim payments. WHAT THE CHANGES DO…
WHY NOT KNOWING THE RULES ABOUT SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM COULD COST YOU MORE THAN YOU WILL EVER EARN…
So far this year there have been over half a dozen cases relating to mis-service of the claim form reported on this blog. In many of the cases the claimant’s difficulties appear to be virtually self-inflicted. Several of the cases…
PROVING THINGS 216: THE DANGERS OF RELYING ON EXPERT REPORT TO PROVE VALUE
There are some similarities between the case of Serene Construction Ltd v Salata and Associates Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2433 (Ch) and the previous post in this series. In both cases the claimant’s case related to the valuation of…
COURT FEES INCREASE: READ ALL ABOUT IT: COMING TO A COURT NEAR YOU SOON
After a consultation process the Ministry of Justice has produced “Court and Tribunal Fees The Government response to the consultation on ‘Increasing selected court fees and Help with Fees income thresholds by inflation’ IN A NUTSHELL Court fees will be…
PROVING THINGS 215: CLAIM £8.7 MILLION IN DAMAGES BUT RECOVER NOTHING: NOT SO MUCH A CASE OF EXPERT SHOPPING BUT EXPERTS ON SHOPPING CENTRES
We have looked before at the judgment of HHJ Hodge (sitting as a High Court judge) in Ahuja Investments Ltd v Victorygame Ltd & Anor (CONTRACT – Purchase of commercial investment property) [2021] EWHC 2382 (Ch). It is worth noting that…
THAT CASE WHERE A CLAIMANT’S LAWYERS FAILED TO SERVE THE CLAIM FORM PROPERLY (THE SECOND TIME AGAINST THE SOLICITORS WHO WERE NEGLIGENT ON THE FIRST OCCASION)
If ever a case illustrated the dangers of not appreciating the rules as to service of the claim form. Dzekova -v- Thomas Eggar LLP [2015] EWHC 2600 (QB) which we have looked briefly before. It reveals a sorry tale of…
PERSONAL INJURY ACTION BROUGHT AFTER EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL SETTLEMENT NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DEFENDANT HAS GOT WHAT IT SIGNED UP TO…
In Farnham-Oliver v RM Educational Resources Ltd [2021] EWHC 2418 (QB) Master Dagnall rejected an argument that personal injury proceedings, brought after employment proceedings had been settled, were an abuse of process. The settlement agreement had specifically stated that it…
You must be logged in to post a comment.