WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE AFTER JUDGMENT ON LIABILITY: A REVIEW OF THE CASES
We are looking again at the judgment of Jason Beer KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Celebrity Speakers Ltd v Daniel & Ors [2023] EWHC 2158 (KB). The judge had to consider what a defendant could argue as…
INSOLVENCY FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS: WEBINAR 15th SEPTEMBER 2023
Issues relating to individual insolvency, a claimant’s bankruptcy or the defendant’s financial position can loom large in some cases. From a claimant’s solicitor finding out, half way through a case, that their client is bankrupt, to the issues of proceeding…
SECTION 33 APPLICATION IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: THE SINS OF THE SOLICITORS WERE NOT VISITED UPON THE CLAIMANT: ACTION ALLOWED TO PROCEED WHEN IT WAS 5 1/2 YEARS OUT OF TIME
We looked at the judgment in Shaw v Maguire (Re Preliminary Issues) [2023] EWHC 2155 (KB) in an earlier post where Master Cook held that the court had a discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 in a fatal…
FATAL ACCIDENTS AND LIMITATION: THERE IS NO BAR TO SECTION 33 BEING USED IF THE LIMITATION PERIOD EXPIRED PRIOR TO DECEASED PERSON’S DEATH
In Shaw v Maguire (Re Preliminary Issues) [2023] EWHC 2155 (KB) Master Cook considered an issue relating to limitation, Section 33 and fatal accident claims. Can a claimant rely on Section 33 in circumstances where the limitation period had expired…
CAN A CLAIMANT RECOVER MORE THAN THEY HAVE CLAIMED IN THE CLAIM FORM? YES THEY CAN…
We will be looking several aspects of the judgment of Jason Beer KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Celebrity Speakers Ltd v Daniel & Ors [2023] EWHC 2158 (KB). The first issue is a surprisingly common one. Can…
DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: “THE SCHEDULE WAS A FICTION … THE POINT WAS RECOGNISED ON BEHALF OF BOTH CLAIMANTS”: SELECTED QUOTES (AND A WEBINAR)
The the judgment of Costs Judge James in HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO) is one of a long series of cases where judges have been critical of the way in which schedules of damages have been…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FRAGILITY OF MEMORY AND THE DANGERS THIS POSES
A major issue at most trials is the question of what a witness can actual “remember”. How much of a witness statement is genuine recollection and how much is implanted? Much judicial time is spent in considering this question. There…
THE COVER UP IS INVARIABLY WORSE THAN THE ERROR: WHAT TO DO WHEN MISTAKES ARE MADE
The post earlier this week based on the article by the Honourable Joseph Quinn led to to look in detail at one point made – that of avoiding a “cover up” and acting immediately to deal with mistakes. This led…
COST BITES 98: THE SIMILARITIES IN MEDICAL REPORTS SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE COSTS OF REPORTS
We are returning again to HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO) Costs Judge James considered the sums that should be allowed in relation to the claimants’ medical reports. This involved a close examination of the reports…
SKELETON ARGUMENTS: KEY POINTS AND ISSUES: ANOTHER 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…
SOCIAL MEDIA AND LITIGATION: THE RETIRED JUDGE’S VIEW: “THE WORLD’S PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR – ON RETAINER FOR EVERYONE”
Over many years this blog has looked at several judgments and articles, by the Canadian judge, The Honourable Joseph Quinn. I refer people often to Things Lawyers do to Annoy Judges, and the judgment in Hearing Clinic (Niagara Falls) Inc…
MAJOR PROBLEMS WHEN THE JUDGE IS “NOT IMPRESSED” BY THE SCHEDULES OF LOSS: “MUCH TIME WAS THROWN AWAY ON CALCULATIONS BASED ON THE WRONG PREMISES”
We are returning to the judgment of Costs Judge James in HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO). This is a case that anyone drafting a Schedule of Damages should read. These actions were settled well before…
COST BITES 97: CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED 62.3 HOURS TO DRAFT THE LETTER OF CLAIM: WHAT SHOULD LETTERS OF CLAIM CONTAIN?
In HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO) Costs Judge James considered the question of how much time should have been spent drafting a letter of claim in a clinical negligence case. She disallowed the 62…
TWELVE KEY POINTS FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS ABOUT BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY (AND A PLUG FOR A WEBINAR)
I still see, on a fairly regular basis, problems caused in personal injury cases where a claimant is bankrupt and has failed to tell their lawyers. Equally often there are cases where it is clear that a claimant is, or…
WHEN LAWYERS GIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IS ESSENTIAL
We are looking back at a post in 2019. Primarily because the issues the case raises in relation to lawyers making witness statements are prevalent. There are numerous examples on this blog of the difficulties that can occur when a…
AN OFFER WAS A VALID PART 36 OFFER: THE CLAIMANTS HAD DONE BETTER THAN THAT OFFER: IT WAS NOT UNJUST FOR NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES TO FOLLOW
In Colicci & Ors v Grinberg & Anor (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 2075 (Ch) Recorder Mark Anderson KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that claimants had done better than their own Part 36 offers. He rejected the defendants’…
TRIAL JUDGE’S FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY OVERTURNED: BECAUSE THE DISHONESTY WAS NOT “FUNDAMENTAL”
In Denzil v Mohammed & Anor [2023] EWHC 2077 (KB) Mr Justice Freedman overturned a finding by a trial judge that a claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. The finding that a minor head injury which was not part of the…
RUDE OR “ROBUST” CORRESPONDENCE? GUIDANCE ON AVOIDING INFLAMMATORY LANGUAGE OR BEING GRATUIOUSLY OFFENSIVE
This is a repeat of a post first written in August 2017. At that time the Solicitors Regulatory Authority had just issued on “Offensive communications” (the link is to an updated version from 2019). It gave me a chance to…
WHEN THE PARTIES COULD NOT AGREE WHO THE JOINT EXPERT SHOULD BE: FAILURE TO ENGAGE COST THE CLAIMANT
I cannot remember many judgments where the sole issue has been who the jointly instructed expert should be. However we have such a case in the judgment of Mr Nicholas Thompsell (sitting as a High Court judge) in Gheewalla v…
WITNESS STATEMENTS, PART 18 QUESTIONS AND CASE MANAGEMENT: THE MASTER WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO DISCLOSE HIS WITNESS EVIDENCE FIRST
It has taken to the third time of writing about the decision in Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB) to get to the detail of what the appeal was actually about. This part of the judgment is important…
THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WERE TOO LONG, TOO CONFUSING AND DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES.
In Halsion Limited v St Thomas Street Development Limited [2023] EWHC 2045 (TCC) HHJ Cawson KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, struck out the claimant’s Particulars of Claim. The Particulars were too long and rambling and failed to comply…
EXPERTS: WHY IT IS UNWISE FOR A CLAIMANT TO BE AT A JOINT MEETING ON SITE: WHO SAYS YOU ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO CALL EXPERT EVIDENCE ANYWAY? HIGH COURT DECISION
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB). This time looking at the observations made in relation to experts. Firstly it was unwise for a claimant to be present,…
ISSUING HIGH VALUE PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS: LOCAL IS USUALLY BEST: HIGH COURT DECISION
I am grateful to all those readers who brought my attention to the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB), in particular to the section on the wisdom of issuing in local…
CONCISION AND BREVITY IS BEST: (I’M SAYING THIS AGAIN…): EXAMPLES FROM HOME AND ABROAD
I am mining the back catalogue of this log (that is repeating myself again) to look at a post originally written in August 2016. It looked at judicial complaints about the length of submissions. This was where the judges were…
THE IMPORTANCE OF TAKING FULL WITNESS STATEMENTS: A RECAP: IF A FULLER WITNESS STATEMENT HAD BEEN TAKEN THE LOSS AT TRIAL COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED
As part of the series looking back at previous posts we are revisiting a case first looked at in 2014. It provides a good example of the very real dangers of not taking a comprehensive statement. A witness was interviewed…
AN INTERESTING ISSUE: CLAIMANT WHO FAILS TO PLEAD CONTRACTUAL INTEREST – DOESN’T GET INTEREST AT ALL
The judgment of Mr Justice Foxton in Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc v Goodrich Corporation [2023] EWHC 2002 (Comm) illustrates an important issue in relation to interest. If a successful party has a contractual right to interest, but has not pleaded that…
PROVING THINGS 231: “WITNESS STATEMENTS” THAT ARE IN FACT EXPERT REPORTS: IDENTICAL PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE PARTY IN DEFAULT
In Cheshire Estate and legal Limited -v- Blanchfield & Others* HHJ Bever, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, considered witness statements served by the claimant that failed to comply with the Practice Direction. One was expert evidence posing…
You must be logged in to post a comment.