CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND PART 36: A USEFUL NOTE OF JUDGMENT
I am grateful to solicitor Bethan Parry from Browne Jacobson for sending me a note of the decision of HHJ Khan in Rix -v- Wall, the details of which are set out below. The note is interesting in that it…
ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE TO BRIGHTEN UP YOUR DAY: SERVICE AT THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS: CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL IN HIS ARGUMENTS ABOUT KNOWLEDGE
There are a number of issues relating to service of the claim form in the judgment of Peter MacDonald Eggers KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Boettcher v (Xio (UK) LLP & Ors [2023] EWHC 801 (Comm). Here…
COST BITES 79: JUDGE AWARDS GUIDELINE RATES EVEN IN HEAVY COMMERCIAL CASE
In Manek & Ors v 360 One WAM Ltd & Ors (Re Consequentials) [2023] EWHC 985 (Comm) Simon Rainey KC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) declined to award rates that were higher than the Guideline Rates in…
CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO CONTINUE WITH THIRD SET OF PROCEEDINGS REFUSED: CPR 38.7 CONSIDERED IN DETAIL
In Danielewicz v Cannon & Anor [2023] EWHC 948 (KB) Master Thornett refused the claimant’s application for an order under CPR 38.7. The claimant had issued proceedings twice before, but discontinued those actions. The judgment contains a detailed consideration of…
SECTION 33 APPLICATION ALLOWED IN ACTION ISSUED 4 YEARS AFTER LIMITATION EXPIRED
In Tyers v Aegis Defence Services (BVI) Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 896 (KB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer allowed an application under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 in a case where the proceedings were issued 7 years after…
Social media, personal injury litigation and personal injury lawyers: Webinar 5th May 2023
The use of social media in litigation is now widespread. An understanding of how and why it is used is essential to the modern litigator. The webinar will looks the use of social media in the courts: examining the case…
BEWARE OF OVER-EAGER EXPERTS: AN EXPERT THAT SIMPLY ADDRESSES THE POINTS THAT SUPPORTS THEIR HYPOTHESIS IS HEADING FOR TROUBLE
In Rowbottom v The Estate of Peter Howard, Deceased & Anor [2023] EWHC 931 (KB) HHL Sephton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) was critical of the role of one of the experts in the case. “A second reason…
THE EXTENSION OF FIXED COSTS: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDES
The extension of fixed costs is a major topic. I will write about the practical implications when we are nearer to the implementation date. In the interim there are some useful links and guides. THE RULES The new rules…
COST BITES 78: A CASE WHERE A LAWYER WAS CONFINED TO LITIGANT IN PERSON RATES
In Wilson v Emmott [2023] EWHC 816 (KB) Mr Justice Saini (sitting with Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker as a costs assessor) rejected a lawyer’s appeal against a decision that the lawyer was only entitled to recover costs on the basis…
WASTED COSTS AGAINST A SOLICITOR BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO ENSURE THE CLAIMANT HAD PROBATE PRIOR TO ISSUE: A CASE TO POINT
I am grateful to solicitor Jonathan Fuggle of Browne Jacobson for sending me a copy of the judgment in Rafferty -v- Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust, a copy of which is available here 1460100_Rafferty v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust_Approved Judgment_31.05.22 (2). …
COST BITES 77: JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT TERMS OF DISCOUNTED CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS MEANT THE SOLICITORS WERE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY COSTS OF ALL: COMPULSORY READING HERE – AND MUCH TO THINK ABOUT
The judgment of Judge Brown, sitting as a Master of the Kings Bench, in Ascension Asset Management Ltd & Anor v Sky Solicitors Ltd [2023] EWHC 875 (KB) should be mandatory reading for any litigator who enters into a retainer…
COST BITES 76: COURT DID NOT MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST HEALTH AUTHORITY IN A WELFARE CASE: THERE ARE OTHER WAYS A COURT CAN SHOW ITS DISAPPROVAL OF A PARTY’S CONDUCT OF A CASE
In West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust v AX (Rev1) [2023] EWCOP 11 Vikram Sachdeva KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused an application for costs against a health authority. The judgment contains a review of the rules relating to…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: WEBINAR 25th APRIL 2023
This blog spends a lot of time looking at cases where things have gone wrong, for one reason and another. This webinar on the 25th April 2023 looks at the main problem areas in litigation and the practical steps that…
COST BITES 75: LIABILITY TO COSTS: RETROSPECTIVE ATTEMPT TO VARY COSTS BUDGET: WITHOUT PREJUDICE OFFER AFFECTS LIABILITY TO COSTS MADE PRIOR TO THAT OFFER
We looked at the judgment of HHJ Hodge QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Wigan Borough Council v Scullindale Global Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 779 (Ch) in an earlier post on Proving Things. There is a subsequent…
COST BITES 74: CLAIMANTS HAVE TO PAY THE COSTS OF DISCONTINUED APPLICATION FOR A GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: COUNTING THE COPPERS
In Beck & Ors v Police Federation of England and Wales (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 685 (KB) Senior Master Fontaine held that the claimants should pay the costs of an – abandoned – application for a Group Litigation Order. “I…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: SOCIAL MEDIA, SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE AND A LONG WALK
I am grateful to Legal Executive Vanessa Brooks for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Harrison in Thomas -v- Owen (21st March 2023, Cardiff County Court). It is another example of social media playing a part in…
ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE – BUT WITH A DIFFERENCE: ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE CLAIM FORM CONTAINED NO FACTS AT ALL
In Free Leisure Ltd (t/a “Cirque Le Soir”) v Peidl And Company Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 792 (Comm) Charles Hollander KC, sitting as a High Court judge considered the appropriate course when the “facts” section of the claim form…
HOURLY RATES ON DETAILED ASSESSMENT ABOVE THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: A STARTING POINT BUT NOT NECESSARILY THE FINISHING POINT
In Various Claimants v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2023] EWHC 827 (SCCO) Costs Judge Rowley made some observations on the use of the Guideline Hourly rates in a detailed assessment. These may well be the starting point, they do not…
Drafting witness statements the rules, the guidance and the cases: Webinar 18th APRIL 2023
Judges regularly complain that witness statements are inadequate and do not contain sufficient information, alternatively that they contain much information that is irrelevant and the witness is unable to give. This webinar looks in detail at the rules and practice…
EXPERT WITNESS OBTAINS ANONYMITY: BUT THEIR TONE DEMONSTRATED DISRESPECT FOR THE COURT
An earlier post dealt with the judge’s decision in M v F & Anor [2022] EWFC. However there is a subsequent judgment that demonstrates an extraordinary response on the part of the expert involved. In a second judgment, M v F &…
PARTS OF THE EXPERT’S REPORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RED FLAG TO LAWYERS: JUDGE CONSIDERS WHETHER THE PARTIES HAD INSTRUCTED THE CORRECT EXPERT
In M v F & Anor [2022] EWFC 186 Recorder Reed set out the importance of an expert knowing, and complying with, the rules relating to the presentation of expert evidence. The judgment also emphasises the importance of the lawyers…
COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO CLAIMANTS TO CHANGE EXPERTS: BUT WITH CONDITIONS
The principles relating to the court granting permission to a party to change expert were considered in detail by Mrs Justice O’Farrell in Avantage (Cheshire) Ltd & Ors v GB Building Solutions Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 802 (TCC). The…
ANOTHER CHANGE IN THE RULES ON APRIL 6th: PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS CAN SAY GOODBYE (IN SOME CASES) TO THE ADMIRALTY COURT
The focus on the new rules on QOCS coming into force on the 6th April may lead to losing sight of some other changes. In particular the new rules and amendments to the Practice Direction in relation to accidents at…
LITIGANTS SUBJECT TO A CIVIL PROCEEDINGS ORDER CANNOT ISSUE VALID PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT PRIOR ORDER FROM THE COURT: “RETROSPECTIVE PERMISSION” HAD NO EFFECT: ACTION WAS A NULLITY
In Williamson v The Bishop of London & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 379 the Court of Appeal held that a person subject to a Civil Proceedings Order must obtain permission from the High Court so they could issue valid proceedings. …
PART 36 RULES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: WAS THE OFFER MADE IN TIME? WAS THE OFFER VALID? WHEN DOES A TRIAL “START”? WAS IT UNJUST FOR THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY?
The judgment of Andrew Sutcliffe KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, in Mate v Mate & Ors [2023] EWHC 806 (Ch) involves a consideration of several issues in relation to Part 36. The judge decided that a Part 36…
Damages for pain and suffering: The legal principles and their practical implications: Webinar 12th April 2023
On the 12th April 2023 I am presenting a webinar on “Damages for pain and suffering”. Looking, in a detailed way at the practical issues that a litigator has to consider when dealing with awards for pain and suffering. The…
DEFENDANT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN WITNESS EVIDENCE SERVED ONE YEAR LATE: WIDER INTERESTS OF JUSTICE CONSIDERED
I am grateful to barrister Andrew McLaughlin for drawing my attention to the judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Tiernan-Spratt & Anor v City Of Wolverhampton Council [2023] EWHC 811 (KB). It concerns a successful appeal. The judge at first…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FOUND: “GOOD DAYS AND BAD DAYS” DID NOT PERSUADE THE COURT
I am grateful to barrister Andrew Ward for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Eyre which was handed down earlier this afternoon. In Mantey -v- Ministry of Defenchttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/2023/761.htmle [2023] EWHC 761 (KB) a finding of fundamental…
INSURER FAILED IN PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION: BUT… IF THE RIGHT PARTY HAD BROUGHT THE APPLICATION IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED
The judgment of Mr Justice Baker in Holt v Allianz Insurance Plc [2023] EWHC 790 (KB) is another round in a long running battle between car hire companies and insurers. Whilst the insurer may have lost this round it is…
PROVING THINGS 252: THE SOLICITORS WERE NEGLIGENT BUT THERE WAS NO LOSS: CLAIM DISMISSED
Many a salutary lesson can be learnt from the judgment of Mrs Justice Bacon in Cutlers Holdings Ltd & Anor v Shepherd And Wedderburn LLP [2023] EWHC 720 (Ch). It was a case about negligence in the conduct of litigation….
HANDWRITING EXPERTS COME UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE NOT ACCEPTED
Issues relating to handwriting experts comprise a surprisingly large percentage of the search terms that lead to this blog. The question of the quality of such experts was considered by Master Clark in Watts v Watts [2023] EWHC 679 (Ch)….
PROVING THINGS 251: PROVING THAT YOU STOLE MY DRAGON IS NOT AN EASY TASK: FIRE BREATHING MONSTERS ARE A VERY OLD CONCEPT INDEED
In Evans v John Lewis Plc & Anor [2023] EWHC 766 (IPECP HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a High Court Judge) had to compare and contrast two fictional dragons. The claimant failed to establish that the defendants’ dragon was so…
FAILURE TO SERVE A DEFENDANT PROPERLY AND ISSUING OUT OF TIME: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Muhammad v Daily The News International & Ors (Rev1) [2023] EWHC 674 (KB) Master Cook determined a number of procedural issues. Here we look at two: (1) the failure to serve on a defendant properly; (2) the question of…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS FROM APRIL 6th: OMNIBUS EDITION
The new rules on QOCS come into force on the 6th April. Here is a review of the key points as to issue, the consequences and links to useful commentary. WHEN THE RULES COME INTO FORCE The key date…
HEARING AND TRIAL BUNDLES: ARE THE COSTS OF PREPARATION RECOVERABLE? WELL, YES THEY ARE (IN PART)
There was some discussion on Twitter earlier this evening as to whether the cost of preparing bundles is recoverable at all. Since we have not had a case featuring a judicial complaint about bundles for several months* and “bundle cases”…
ISSUING IN HASTE BEFORE APRIL 6th: DO NOT REPENT AT LEISURE WITH SERVICE ISSUES IN FOUR MONTHS’ TIME
I have been told that there has been a flurry of activity this week with claimants anxious to issue proceedings before the change in the rules relating to QOCS. One problem with this is that there will now be numerous…
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 30th MARCH 2023
The changes to the rules as to the set off of QOCS for action issued on or after the 6th April 2023 makes the proper assessment of Part 36 offers of even more importance. Not only will the costs incurred…
MAKE UNJUSTIFIED ALLEGATIONS IN A LETTER OF CLAIM AT YOUR PERIL – YOU CAN PAY THE COSTS: ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS
The judgment of Deputy Master Nurse in Stubbins Marketing Ltd & Ors v Rayner Essex LLP & Anor [2023] EWHC 515 (Ch) contains an important lesson for anyone drafting a letter of claim. The judge ordered that the claimants pay…
AGREEING EXTENSIONS OF TIME FOR SERVICE: THE ESSENTIAL POINT THAT THEY MUST BE IN WRITING
An interesting issue about “agreements” is referred to in the judgment of Mr Justice Kerr in Clarion Housing Association Ltd v Crest Nicholson Operations Ltd [2023] EWHC 620 (TCC). I will be looking at the case in more detail later. …
APRIL 5th IS AN IMPORTANT DATE: WHAT IS MEANT BY “ISSUED” IN THE CONTEXT OF CHANGES TO QOCS?
The new rules relating to the ability to set off defendant’s costs liabilities against a claimant’s costs and damages have, I am told, led to a rush to issue proceedings and a backlog in some courts. These rules come into…
A LITIGANT CAN “APPEAR” AT A SMALL CLAIMS TRACK HEARING BY THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Owen v Black Horse Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 325 the Court of Appeal allowed the claimant’s appeal. The claim had been struck out at the start of a Small Claims Track hearing on the grounds that attendance by the…
PART 36, COSTS: THE JUDGE WAS CORRECT NOT TO FIND THAT PART 36 CONSEQUENCES SHOULD NOT APPLY: A DISPUTE “CONDUCTED IN AN ENTIRELY DISPROPORTIONATE WAY AND AT ENTIRELY DISPROPORTIONATE COST”
In Lampor & Ors v Jones [2023] EWHC 667 (Ch) Mr Justice Mellor dismissed the appeals by both parties in relation to costs orders made following Part 36 offers. The trial judge had held that the defendant had failed to…
COST BITES 73: APPEAL ON HOURLY RATES DID NOT GO AS THE APPELLANT PLANNED: THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES AND DETAILED ASSESSMENT
In Harlow District Council v Powerrapid Limited (Rev1) [2023] EWHC 586 (KB) Mr Justice Choudhury, sitting with Costs Judge Rowley as an assessor, rejected an appeal about the hourly rates allowed by the costs judge. There are important passages about…
THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER – MAXIMISING RECOVERY ON ASSESSMENT: WEBINAR 6th APRIL 2023
I am presenting a webinar on the 6th April 2023 – The Costs Judge Over Your Shoulder 2023 – Maximising recovery. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR “Here the reduction was very large and the reason for the reduction was…
WITNESS CREDIBILITY, MEMORY AND ACCURACY: REVISITING GESTMIN
This is another opportune time to re-visit the principles in Gestmin SGPS S.A. -v- Credit Suisse [2013] EWCA 3560 (Comm). This is case that is now mentioned regularly in cases involving witness recollection and dispute of facts. WHY LOOK AT GESTMIN?…
THE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS LATE: CLAIMANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: DEFENDANT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: EQUALITY IS NOT ALWAYS EQUITY
It is quite possible that both parties in an action could be in default. One party could be granted relief from sanctions for that default and the other refused. This is precisely what happened in Shill Properties Ltd v Bunch…
CROWING OVER COSTS IS NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR A LITIGANT: A REMINDER OF THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA
We are looking again at the judgment of Lord Justice Underhill in Credico Marketing Ltd & Anor v Lambert & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 262. There is a very brief passage which serves as a reminder that clients can expect…
THE ABSENCE OF A REPLY TO A DEFENCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT COULD BE ASSUMED THAT THE ACCOUNT IN THE DEFENCE WAS ACCEPTED
There is a breach statement in the judgment of Lady Justice Andrews in Zanatta v Metroline Travel Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 224 that highlights a crucial point in relation to the drafting of a Reply. Whereas a Reply and Defence…
PROVING THINGS 250: FAILING TO PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: A BARE ASSERTION IS NOT ADEQUATE
The judgment of Lord Justice Underhill (refusing permission to appeal) in Credico Marketing Ltd & Anor v Lambert & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 262 relates a party who failed to adduce sufficient evidence to show impecuniosity. “No evidence of Mr…
PROVING THINGS 249: APPELLANT FAILS TO PROVE LACK OF CAPACITY: SHORTFALLS WITH THE EXPERT EVIDENCE
In Cannon v Bar Standards Board [2023] EWCA Civ 278 the Court of Appeal held that expert evidence placed before it failed to establish that an appellant lacked capacity. The case provides importance guidance about the nature and quality of…
You must be logged in to post a comment.