COST BITES 12: A DEFENDANT WHO IS NOT A PARTY TO AN APPEAL CAN STILL BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS OF THAT APPEAL
In Turner & Ors v Thomas & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1944 (Ch) Mr Justice Zacaroli considered the appropriate principles to be applied as to costs when a defendant was not a party to an appeal made by a co-defendant….
THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS OF A WITNESS STATEMENT: A CHECKLIST AND A REMINDER
This checklist covers the basic element of witness statements. It does not cover all the requirements of statements in the Business and Property Courts, guidance on those specific rules can be found in several posts on this blog, here and…
THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION TO SERVE A CLAIM FORM: “CLEAR WATER” BETWEEN THE TWO TESTS: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS ORDER SETTING ASIDE A PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION FOR SERVICE
In ST v BAI (SA) Trading As Brittany Ferries [2022] EWCA Civ 1037 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision, itself made on appeal, where a prospective application to extend time for service of the claim form was set aside….
COST BITES 11: INTEREST ON COSTS: JUDGE FINDS IT APPROPRIATE TO BACKDATE INTEREST
In Vitol SA v Genser Energy Ghana Ltd [2022] EWHC 1955 (Comm) Ms Lesley Anderson QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered whether interest should be payable on costs from a date before judgment. She held that interest…
THE FIRST TIME YOU MAKE A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES – SHOULD NOT BE IN THE DRAFT ORDER AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL HEARING
There is an interesting short judgment of the Court of Appeal in BG & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Suffolk County Council (Consequentials) [2022] EWCA Civ 1053 relating to an attempt by the successful party to put an…
COST BITES 10: COURT OF APPEAL UNHAPPY AT £730,000 BILL FOR ONE DAY APPEAL: HOURLY RATES ABOVE GUIDELINES HAVE TO BE JUSTIFIED, COUNSEL’S FEES MUST BE REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONATE
In Athena Capital Fund SICAV-FIS SCA & Ors v Secretariat of State for the Holy See (Costs) [2022] EWCA Civ 1061 the Court of Appeal were concerned about the level of costs being claimed in a one day appeal. The…
PROVING THINGS 234: PROVIDE AN EXPLANATION FOR DELAY BY EVIDENCE – NOT BY SUBMISSIONS
The judgment of Mr Justice Henshaw in Hays & Ors v Bloomfield Investments LLC [2022] EWHC 1648 (Comm) was on a very specific area of procedure. However there is one matter of more general interest. The need to have evidence…
PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES: THE IMPORTANCE OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: WEBINAR 9th SEPTEMBER 2022
This webinar looks at recent cases in relation to periodical payments and provisional damages and considers their practical implications for personal injury practitioners. Booking details are available here. WEBINAR CONTENTS Cases to be considered include: The decision in Mathieu v…
COST BITES 9: FARES FAIR: IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS YOU CAN HAVE A “SCORE DRAW” AND EACH SIDE GETS NO COSTS
In United Trade Action Group Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Transport for London & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 1026 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that there be no order for costs between the parties in judicial…
Witness statements in the client’s own words: Witness statements when the client’s first language is not English: Webinar today
I am giving a webinar on the 25th July 2022 at 12.00 on “Witness statements in the client’s own words: Witness statements when the client’s first language is not English.” Booking details can be found here. (The webinar will be…
YOU CAN’T RAISE A NEW CLAIM IN A RESPONSE TO A PART 18 REQUEST: THE PLEADED CASE REMAINS IMPORTANT
In Costa v DissociaDID Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 1934 (IPEC) HHJ Hacon rejected the defendants’ attempt to argue points that were not pleaded. The only time an issue had been raised was in response to Part 18 requests. This…
SKELETON ARGUMENTS: KEY POINTS AND ISSUES: A REMINDER
Periodically I reprise the links to online guidance on skeleton arguments. Here we have a series of links to posts and articles giving guidance on written submissions. “Sir James Hunt has told us of the (unattributed) judicial reaction on receiving…
THE ESTATE OF A DECEASED PERSON CAN BE SUBSTITUTED AS A PARTY WHEN THERE IS A PROVISIONAL DAMAGES ORDER: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Power v Bernard Hastie & Company Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1927 (QB) Mr Justice Johnson held that the estate of a claimant who had obtained an provisional damages order can take advantage of that order. The order was…
CLAIMANT FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST WHEN GIVING EVIDENCE ABOUT A BICYCLE
My attention has recently been drawn to the judgment of HHJ Ralton in Darnley -v- Cornish 2021 WL 04760420. The judge, on appeal, overturned a finding that a claimant, who had misled the court as to ownership of a bicycle…
COST BITES 8: CENTRAL LONDON HOURLY RATES: THE RATE DEPENDS ON THE LITIGATION NOT THE LITIGATOR
In Brake & Anor v Guy & Ors [2022] EWHC 1911 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge). Considered the appropriate hourly rate to be applied on an application. Although costs were being assessed on an indemnity…
COURT OF APPEAL REJECTS INGENIOUS ARGUMENT THAT PERMISSION GROUNDS SHOULD BE RE-OPENED – AFTER THE APPEAL
I have written more about applications for permission to appeal in the past few weeks than in the previous nine years. The Court of Appeal judgment in Ingenious Games LLP & Ors v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs…
APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL WAS MADE OUT OF TIME: THE TRIAL JUDGE HAD NO JURISDICTION TO HEAR THE APPLICATION
There is another aspect of the judgment in Omya UK Ltd v Andrews Excavations Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 1882 (TCC) that is worth considering. The unsuccessful defendants applied for permission to appeal to the trial judge at the hearing…
SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: HAVE COGENT EVIDENCE (AND A DRAFT DEFENCE) TO HAND: DEFENDANT’S DELAY ALONE WOULD HAVE LED TO APPLICATION BEING REFUSED IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE
I am grateful to Barrister Leslie Keegan for their note of the judgment of Master Cook in Buckingham -v- Elneil (15th July 2022)*. The Master refused the defendant’s application to set aside a default judgment. The defendant did not have…
CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER WHICH INVOLVED A 1.15% DISCOUNT WAS A GENUINE ONE:EVEN A NARROW MARGIN MEANS DEFENDANTS FACE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES
In Omya UK Ltd v Andrews Excavations Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 1882 (TCC) Mr Roger Ter Haar QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, found that a claimant’s offer that was some 1.15% less than the sum awarded…
WEBINARS ON KEEPING YOUR COOL: UNDERSETTLEMENT, PROCEDURAL PITFALLS AND LIMITATION PROBLEMS: AVOIDING MATTERS HEATING UP WHEN THE HEATWAVE IS OVER
In September I am presenting a number of webinars with the theme of “avoiding problems”. These are avoiding undersettlement: avoiding procedural pitfalls and avoiding problems with limitation. “AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: A GUIDE FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS” 19th September 2022 …