FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES: A CLAIM FOR SERVICES CAN BE BASED ON THE COSTS OF COMMERCIAL REPLACEMENT – WITHOUT DISCOUNT
The Court of Appeal decision in Steve Hill Ltd v Witham [2021] EWCA Civ 1312 contains an important consideration of the basis upon which claims for loss of services are calculated in a fatal accident case. FATAL ACCIDENT -…
“THE ONLY BENEFICIARIES FROM THIS NIHILISTIC LITIGATION HAVE BEEN THE SPECIALIST AND HIGH-QUALITY LAWYERS”: A FAMILY LAW CASE, POSTED WITHOUT COMMENT
Occasionally, very occasionally, this blog trespasses into the area of family law. This is usually about costs or evidence. Today it is about costs, the comments of Mr Justice Peel in Crowther v Crowther & Ors (Financial Remedies) [2021] EWFC…
WITNESS STATEMENT IN RESPONSE TO EVIDENCE GIVEN IN TRIAL NOT PERMITTED: COURT ANXIOUS TO AVOID A NEVER ENDING SPIRAL
In Brake & Ors v The Chedington Court Estate Ltd (New Witness Statement) [2021] EWHC 2882 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews refused an application for permission to adduce an additional witness statement. “Of course, it is natural for litigants to…
THE JUDGMENT IN JALLA -V- SHELL: THE JUDGMENT OF LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL: THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION FOR DELAY
The case of Jalla & Anor v Shell International Trading And Shipping Co. Ltd & Anor (Appeal 3: Refusal to Extend Time) [2021] EWCA Civ 1559 was covered in the previous post. It is worthwhile looking at the shorter judgment…
COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION NOT TO EXTEND TIME FOR COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDER: 28,000 CLAIMS BITE THE DUST
In the decision today in Jalla & Anor v Shell International Trading And Shipping Co. Ltd & Anor (Appeal 3: Refusal to Extend Time)[2021] EWCA Civ 1559 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision not to grant extensions of time…
IS A CLUB YARD A “PUBLIC PLACE”? REVERSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO INSURER DEFENDANTS
In Brown v Fisk & Ors [2021] EWHC 2769 (QB) Master Dagnall granted reverse summary jugment to an insurer defendant. This involved consideration of whether a yard was a “public place” under s.151 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. THE…
CLAIMANT WAS VICTIM OF FRAUD BUT ITS ACTION IS STATUTE BARRED: SECTION 32 (1) OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980 CONSIDERED
In European Real Estate Debt Fund (Cayman) Ltd v Treon & Ors [2021] EWHC 2866 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles made many findings adverse to the defendants. However the claim failed because it was statute barred. The judgment considers the issue…
IN THE RUN UP TO HALLOWEEN 4: THE “TOP 10” THINGS THAT KEEP LAWYERS AWAKE AT NIGHT
Last year I did a Top 10 of lawyer’s nightmares. The intervening year has not changed much, although there may be more emphasis on the failure of remote hearing platforms… We’ll start with every lawyer’s nightmare. Alastair David Time limits!!…
SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: WEBINAR 4th NOVEMBER 2021
On the 4th November I am giving a webinar on surveillance evidence. Booking details are available here. This webinar deals with practice and procedure in relation to the production of surveillance evidence in personal injury cases and looks at: The…
RECORDING COURT PROCEEDING WITHOUT PERMISSION: THE PROBLEM ARISES – AGAIN
In Business Mortgage Finance 4 Plc & Ors v Hussain & Ors [2021] EWHC 2766 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles gave a judgment in another case where a party had recorded proceedings without permission. Permission was given retrospectively, however this was…
INTERPRETERS, REMOTE HEARINGS AND A FAIR TRIAL: HIGH COURT APPEAL DECISION
In Gholizadeh v Sarfraz [2021] EWHC 2814 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles considered the issue of fairness when witnesses, giving evidence remotely, did not use a translator. We have a situation where the defendant’s representatives stated, openly, prior to trial that…
IN THE RUN UP FROM HALLOWEEN 3: SCARY STUFF FROM “THE OTHER SIDE”
This time we are looking at guidance from 2018 This year we are looking at annoying things from “the other side”. That can mean from beyond the grave, or those people who are instructed to represent your client’s opponents (they…
SECRETARY OF STATE DEFENDANT MUST PAY THE ADDITIONAL LIABILITY AFTER IT FAILED TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS: THE “PUBLIC PURSE” HAS NO SPECIAL STATUS AS A LITIGANT
In TT, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC B21 (Costs) Deputy Master Campbell found that the Secretary of State was liable to pay an additional sum when it failed to beat…
APPEAL WAS OUT OF TIME DUE TO FAILURE TO USE EFILING: A POINT TO WATCH
The judgment of Eason Rajah QC (sitting as a Judge of the Chancery Division)in Walker v The Official Receiver [2021] EWHC 2868 (Ch) highlights a problem with appeals in the Chancery Division. The appellant had problems because an appeal was to…
LATE, AND BROAD, APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: HIGH COURT DECISION
In BES Commercial Electricity Ltd & Ors v Cheshire West & Chester Council [2021] EWHC 2820 (QB) Mr Justice Calver refused a very late application to adduce expert evidence. The commentary in relation to witness statements is also interesting. The…
IN THE RUN UP TO HALLOWEEN 2: DEADLINES, COURTS AND IMPOSTER SYNDROME
In the run up to Halloween we continue our look back on posts about “scary subjects”. Here is one of the first series of group contributions, from 2017, where contributors from legal Twitter wrote about what scared them most. “Emailing…
IN THE RUN UP TO HALLOWEEN: MISSIVES FROM THE BENCH: “THAT ONE’S HALF BLIND AND HALF DEAF. I CALL HIM THE COURT OF APPEAL”
In the run up to Halloween I thought I would repeat some of the “scary” posts on this blog. Here we look at a post from November 2018, a collection of Twitter comments about judicial interventions. “DJ Tynas at Macclesfield…
WHEN AT COURT MAKE SURE YOU CAN ALWAYS BE FOUND: PROMPTNESS, SETTING ASIDE AND CPR 39.3(5)
In Altaf & Ors v Close Brothers Ltd [2021] EWHC 2823 (QB) Mr Justice Fordham considered an application made by a defendant who left the court before the trial started. It highlights the importance of every litigant, once they arrive…
CIVIL EVIDENCE AND SOCIAL MEDIA: WEBINAR 28th OCTOBER 2021: GET LINKED IN TO RECENT DEVELOPMENTS…
On the 28th October 2021 I am giving a webinar on Civil Evidence and Social Media. I will be looking at some recent cases where social media has played a part in the outcome of cases. Booking details are available…
DEFENDANTS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED
In Parkes v Hall & Ors [2021] EWHC 2824 (QB) Sir Andrew Nicol refused the defendants’ application for relief from sanctions following failure to comply with a peremptory order. THE CASE The defendants were ordered to file further particulars…
THE NEED FOR ACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES: A PLEA FROM THE BENCH: A 2 1/2 HOUR TIME ESTIMATE REQUIRED TWO DAYS
This is not the first time this blog has noted judicial comments on the need for realistic time estimates. This can be seen clearly in the judgment of HHJ Russen QC in Potgieter v Village [2021] EW Misc 18 (CC)….
SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO DEFENDANT: DAMAGES WERE “DE MINIMIS”: THE LAW WILL NOT SUPPLY A REMEDY WHEN NO HARM HAS CREDIBLY BEEN SHOWN
In Rolfe & Ors v Veale Wasbrough Vizards LLP [2021] EWHC 2809 (QB) Master MCCloud granted the defendant summary judgment in an action for breach of data. “There is no credible case that distress or damage over a de minimis…
A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: HOW IT WORKS IN PRACTICE: THERE IS NO POINT ARGUING ISSUES OF PROPORTIONALITY WHEN INDEMNITY COSTS HAVE BEEN ORDERED
Whenever I report on an assessment of costs, for reasons that can only be guessed at, that post is always widely read. The judgment of HHJ Davis-White QC in Goodwin v Avison & Ors [2021] EWHC 2754 (Ch) involves…
PART 36: OFFERS MUST BE CONSIDERED EVEN THOUGH ALL THE PIECES OF THE JIGSAW ARE NOT IN PLACE: CONSEQUENCES ARE IMPOSED ON THE ACTUAL AMOUNT AWARDED NOT THE SUM THAT THE MAKER WOULD HAVE SETTLED FOR
I am grateful to Professor Dominic Regan for drawing my attention to the judgment of Mr Justice Kerr today in Equitix Eeef Biomass 2 Ltd v Fox & Ors [2021] EWHC 2781 (TCC). The judge rejected the notion that the…
WHEN CAN A COURT TAKE ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES UNDER A CFA INTO ACCOUNT IN THE AWARD OF DAMAGES?
Another aspect of the Court of Appeal judgment in Hirachand v Hirachand & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 1498 was the Court of Appeal’s consideration of whether it was appropriate for the judge to take into account liabilities for costs under a…
COSTS OF ASSESSMENT CAN BE REDUCED BECAUSE BILL WAS REDUCED: NO NEED FOR MISCONDUCT OR SKULDUGGERY
In Milbrooke Construction Ltd v Jones [2021] EWHC B20 (Costs) Costs Judge Brown found that the reduction of a bill of costs by a major percentage can be grounds, in itself, for disallowing part of the receiving party’s costs of…
STATEMENTS OF OPINION AND COMMENT WILL BE REDACTED: WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS: THE NEW RULES CONSIDERED
The judgment of Mrs Justice O’Farrell in Mansion Place Ltd v Fox Industrial Services Ltd [2021] EWHC 2747 is one of the first times the new provisions on witness statements in the Business and Property Courts have been considered by…
WHY THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES COMMITTEE IS MORE APPROPRIATE THAN THE SUPREME COURT (FROM THE SUPREME COURT)
There is one passage in the Supreme Court judgment in Ho -v- Adelkun [2021] UKSC 43 that makes for interesting reading. The Supreme Court made it quite clear that, in procedural issues, the Civil Procedure Rules Committee is often a more…
THE CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO FILE AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE: NO INJUSTICE WHEN A DEBARRED PARTY ATTENDED A TRIAL BY SKYPE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Hirachand v Hirachand & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 1498 the Court of Appeal rejected an argument that a defendant, who had not filed an acknowledgement of service and had been debarred from taking part in the action, suffered injustice…
CAN ONE WITNESS STATEMENT SIMPLY SAY “I AGREE WITH THEM” ? THIS IS NEVER A GOOD IDEA: SOME CASES REVIEWED
I gave a webinar earlier today where an interesting question was asked. If a husband and wife are giving evidence and they agree with each other, can one statement simply say “I agree with them”? This “agreement” of witness statements…
EXPERT EVIDENCE – UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS AND AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 20th OCTOBER 2020
The last few months have seen a large number of cases where expert evidence has proved highly problematic (usually for the party calling the expert in question). On the 20th October 2021 I am giving a webinar “Expert Evidence -…
WASTED COSTS AND THE SOLICITOR AS TARGET: “HEAVY SATELLITE LITIGATION IS TO BE DEPRECATED”
The judgment of Mr Justice Bryan in Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su & Ors [2021] EWHC 2702 (Comm) is essential reading for anyone contemplating making a wasted costs application. It is, of course, equally important for anyone defending such…
PROVING THINGS 217: WHEN AN ACCIDENT IS UNEXPLAINED: RES IPSA LOQUITUR CANNOT ASSIST
The problems of establishing liability when its cause is not certain are set out in the judgment of Mr Justice Robin Knowles in Savigar v Ainscough Crane Hire Ltd [2021] EWHC 2707 (QB). THE CASE The claimant suffered serious…
THE DUTY OF CARE OWED TO A TRESPASSER: A TRAGIC CASE CONSIDERED BY THE COURTS
In Ovu v London Underground Ltd (duty of care) [2021] EWHC 2733 (QB) Master McCloud considered the duty of care owed to a trespasser. Her judgment starts with a reminder that this is a case about the death of a…
DRAFT JUDGMENTS AND THE USE OF EMAIL EXPLODERS: MORE CAUTION IS NEEDED
One particular aspect of the judgment in Optis Cellular Technology Inc & Anor v Apple Retail UK Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2694 (Pat)that requires highlighting is the judge’s consideration of the use of “e-mail exploders” used by the parties when…
FATAL ACCIDENTS: DAY LONG (ONLINE) COURSE ON LAW, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: 12TH NOVEMBER 2021
Alongside solicitor Hilary Wetherell I am presenting a day long course: Fatal Accidents: Law, Practice, Procedure and Compassion 2021. It is an online course on the 12th November 2021. Booking details are available here. THE COURSE This one day virtual course will take…
THE DANGEROUS USE OF PRECEDENTS 2: CIVIL LAWYERS – THE PROBLEMS OCCUR HERE TOO
The previous post on the use of “precedents” in divorce petitions could lead civil lawyers to think that “this couldn’t happen here”. There are numerous examples in civil cases of witness statements being drafted to a plan. PRECEDENT WITNESS…
THE DANGEROUS USE OF “PRECEDENTS”: WHEN 28 DIVORCE PETITIONS MAKE IDENTICAL ALLEGATIONS THEN SOMETHING IS NOT QUITE RIGHT..
The judgment of Mr Justice Moor in Yorston & Ors, Re (Matrimonial Causes Act 1973: Improper Petitions) [2021] EWFC 80 makes interesting reading. The judge was considering a referral from a court which found that 28 divorce petitions, based on…
AN EXTRAORDINARY CASE: DRAFT JUDGMENTS ARE SACROSANCT: ALLEGATIONS OF DISCLOSURE, AND OF “JUDGE’S OFFICE” LEAKING LIKE A SIEVE WERE TOTALLY MISFOUNDED
The judgment in Optis Cellular Technology Inc & Anor v Apple Retail UK Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2694 (Pat) is one of the most extraordinary I have read. It concerns the important principle that draft judgments sent out by…
THE DENTON CRITERIA: LATE APPEALS, NEW EVIDENCE AND PERMISSION TO APPEAL: A PROPOSED APPELLANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO TWO BITES OF THE CHERRY
The judgment of HHJ Karen Walden-Smith in Nagpal v Kumar [2021] EW Misc 17 (CC) illustrates the difficulties faced by a party that requires permission to appeal out of time and wishes to adduce new evidence at the proposed appeal….
DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT COMPLY WITH THE RULES: WEBINAR 14th OCTOBER 2021
As part of a series of webinars on Civil Evidence I am presenting a webinar on witness statements on the 14th October 2021. Looking at rules and guidance relating to witness evidence and the importance of complying with them. Booking…
GRIFFITHS -V- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 3: THE CLAIMANT DID NOT HAVE A FAIR TRIAL: THE COURTS SHOULD NOT ALLOW LITIGATION BY AMBUSH: THE DISSENTING JUDGMENT
NB THE DECISION IN THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT. THE SUPREME COURT ESSENTIALLY AGREEING WITH THE DISSENTING JUDGMENT OF BEAN LJ CONSIDERED IN THIS POST. THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IS DISCUSSED HERE. This is the third post…
GRIFFITHS -v- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 2: THE OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL: AN EXPERT’S REPORT WITHOUT REASONING IS “ALL BUT WORTHLESS”
NB THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION WAS SUBSEQUENTLY OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT – SEE THE DECISION HERE. This is the second post about the Court of Appeal decision in Griffiths v Tui (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1442. Here we…
GRIFFITHS -v- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (1): JUDGES AND EXPERTS: THE COURT IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP
NB THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN GRIFFITHS WAS OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT, SEE THE DISCUSSION HERE. This is the first of a series of posts that consider the Court of Appeal judgment in Griffiths v Tui (UK) Ltd…
SET OFF AND QOCS IN THE SUPREME COURT: DEFENDANT CANNOT SET OFF COSTS ORDERS AGAINST LIABILITY TO CLAIMANT
In the judgment today in Ho -v- Adelkun [2021] UKSC 43 the Supreme Court considered the issue of set off and QOCS. The Court overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal and held that costs orders in favour of…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN CLAIMANT WAS ONE YEAR LATE IN SERVING PARTICULARS OF CLAIM (BUT THERE IS A LITTLE MORE TO THIS…)
In Excotek Ltd v City Air Express Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 2615 (Comm) Mr Justice Henshaw granted a claimant relief from sanctions when it applied to serve Particulars of Claim over a year late. However the parties had agreed…
HOW ISSUING ELECTRONICALLY CAN REALLY CONFUSE CLAIMANTS: PROCEEDINGS SERVED INCORRECTLY AND LATE, SAVED BY SERVICE OF AN UNSEALED CLAIM FORM
Adding to the regular supply of cases on service of the claim form on this blog is the decision of Mr Justice Fraser in Citysprint UK Ltd v Barts Health NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 2618 (TCC). This case contains a…
WHEN AN EMAIL FROM A SOLICITOR IS EVIDENCE OF LOSS: EVIDENCE AT THE STAGE 3 STAGE CONSIDERED ON APPEAL
I am grateful to barrister Sarah Robson for bringing my attention to the decision of HHJ Jarman QC in Akram v Aviva Insurance Ltd [2021] EW Misc 16 (CC). This is a case that highlights the flexibility the courts have…
DELAY IN PURSUING PROCEEDINGS IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: LOCAL AUTHORITY’S INSOUCIENCE A CAUSE FOR CONCERN
In London Borough of Havering & Ors v Persons Unknown & Ors [2021] EWHC 2648 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin had some clear warnings to give in relation to cases where local authorities had failed to pursue cases promptly after obtaining…
NO MATTER HOW BIG YOU ARE, OR HOW IMPORTANT (YOU THINK) YOU ARE – YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES: SECRETARY OF STATE REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE
In Good Law Project Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2021] EWHC 2595 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser issued a clear and stark warning that expert evidence has to comply with the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.