A CLAIM FORM WAS NEVER SERVED PROPERLY AND THE ACTION WAS STRUCK OUT: A TRULY EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF FAILED SERVICE ON A FOREIGN DEFENDANT
I am grateful to barrister Feliks Kwiatkowski for sending me a copy of the judgment today of District Judge Lumb in Perisi -v- Secret Surgery Ltd & Dr Ahmed Eslaftawy, a copy of that judgment is available here Perisi v…
COST BITES 154: SOLICITOR’S COSTS AND ESTIMATES: A CASE THAT EVERY PRIVATE CLIENT AND EVERY LITIGATOR SHOULD READ
If ever there was a graphic warning of the way that costs can escalate beyond estimates it can be found in the judgment of Costs Judge Leonard in Griffin v Kleyman & Co Solicitors Ltd *[2024] EWHC 1151 (SCCO). The judge rejected…
“AN UNWIELDLY COLLECTION OF COURT DOCUMENTS”: A JUDGMENT THAT ENDS THE “BUNDLE DROUGHT”
It has been six months since this blog featured a complaint about trial bundles. That barren period is ended by some observations of Costs Judge Leonard in Griffin v Kleyman & Co Solicitors Ltd *[2024] EWHC 1151 (SCCO). The bundle…
TRANSFER FROM PART 8 TO PART 7 REVISITED: IT CAN BE AN EXPENSIVE BUSINESS
There have been a lot of cases recently regarding the question of whether an action was properly issued using the Part 8 procedure. We looked at the case of ISG Retail Ltd v FK Construction Ltd [2024] EWHC 878 (TCC) in…
AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: A GUIDE FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS: WEBINAR 4th JUNE 2024
This webinar looks at those cases where allegations of under settlement have been made against claimant solicitors, looking at the factors that lead to a court finding whether there was negligence when a case was settled or litigated. Booking details…
WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT BREACH THE PRACTICE DIRECTION: WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH? HIGH COURT DECISION
In Vainker & Anor v Marbank Construction Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 2785 (TCC) Mrs Justice Jefford considered the appropriate approach where a party objected to the contents of witness statements that did not comply with Practice Direction 57AC. She…
EXPERT EVIDENCE, ADJOURNMENTS, CAPACITY AND APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT FOR CONTEMPT: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION AT FIRST INSTANCE
In Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd v Khan & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 53 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of expert evidence in relation to capacity, in the context of applications for contempt of court. It was held that…
THE REAL DANGER OF LAWYERS GETTING INVOLVED IN THE JOINT STATEMENT OF EXPERTS: IT IS WRONG AND IT IS COSTLY: A CASE THAT ILLUSTRATES THE POINT
In Glover & Anor v Fluid Structural Engineers & Technical Designers Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1257 (TCC) Mr Simon Lofthouse K.C., sitting as a High Court Judge, considered the issues that arose when a party had tried to influence…
COST BITES 153: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE BREAKDOWN OF MEDICAL REPORT FEES ONGOING SAGA: THE INVOICE SHOULD PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN
I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF for providing me with a copy of the judgment of Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker in CXR -v- Dome Holdings Limited, a copy of the judgment is available here CXR v Dome…
COST BITES 152: A PARTY MUST PROVIDE A SCHEDULE OF COSTS FOR A HEARING, EVEN IF IT DOESN’T EXPECT TO GET PAID
The judgment of Mr Justice Roth in Scenic International Group Ltd v Adenaike & Ors (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 1178 (Ch) provides some important observations on the mandatory requirement for a party to produce a schedule of costs if it…
JOINING A SOLICITOR INTO AN APPLICATION, WITH A THREAT OF COSTS – LED TO THE APPLICANTS PAYING £45,000 IN COSTS
The case of Tonstate Group Ltd & Ors v Wojakowski & Anor [2024] EWHC 1196 (Ch) is a real world example of the dangers of joining a litigant’s firm of solicitors in an application, threatening to seek costs against them. …
PART 36 THE PAST 12 MONTHS: HOW HUGH GRANT AND THE DUKE OF SUSSEX FEATURE IN A WEBINAR ABOUT CIVIL PROCEDURE: USEFUL WATCHING IF YOU HAVE TIME TO SPARE…
The webinar I gave on the 13th May discussing Part 36 cases over the previous 12 months is now available on YouTube on this link. Cases looked at include: Holden -v- Holden – were Part 36 offers valid offers? Colicci…
MAKING ALLEGATIONS OF DISHONESTY DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY LEAD TO AN ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS: BUT IT MIGHT DO: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
I am grateful to both Kevin Latham and Andrew Buchan for pointing out the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Thakkar & Ors v Mican & Anor [2024] EWCA Civ 552. The court held that a judge had acted…
AVOIDING LIMITATION PROBLEMS AND THE (POSSIBLE) LIFELINE OF SECTION 33: WEBINAR 29th MAY 2024
Over the year this blog has recorded many cases of claimants (but not always claimants) coming to grief because of limitation issues. This webinar is designed to help practitioners avoid limitation problems, looking at major problem areas, common mistakes and…
COSTS BUDGETING: ESSENTIAL GUIDANCE FROM COSTS JUDGE BROWN
Costs Judge Simon Brown has produced a Note to assist in the case management and costs budgeting process in Kings Bench Division involving high value personal injury claim. The purpose of the Note is to “provide a neutral approach to…
COST BITES 151: DOES QOCS APPLY TO DETAILED ASSESSMENT? YES IT DOES – BUT THE DEFENDANT HAS PERMISSION TO APPEAL
In Challis v Bradpiece [2024] EWHC 1124 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered of whether a claimant had QOCS protection in detailed assessment. He concluded that the claimant continued to have costs protection. He accepted that the point was…
AN ACTION THAT HAS BEEN “WAREHOUSED” WILL NORMALLY BE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: COMPELLING REASONS TO THE CONTRARY ARE REQUIRED
In Watford Control Instruments Ltd v Brown [2024] EWHC 1125 (Ch) Mr Justice Richards struck out the claimants action on the grounds that it had “warehoused” the action for several years and this amounted to an abuse of process. Such…
CROSS-EXAMINING EXPERTS: USEFUL GUIDES AND HINTS
There are hundreds of posts on this blog about the role of experts in civil litigation. In many of those cases the experts have been cross-examined and this has not ended well – for them. I have already planned a…
ARGUING ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE BILL: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE DISCLOSURE OF AGENCY COSTS AND MEDICAL FEES WAR: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO COMPLY WITH PART 18 REQUESTS FOR A BREAKDOWN OF THE INVOICE
I am grateful to Ben Millns from Kennedys for sending me a copy of the decision in Parsons -v- Stevens, a copy of which is available here. Deputy District Judge Fentem decided that it was appropriate to make an order…
WHEN IS IT SENSIBLE TO APPLY TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM? NEVER – JUST NEVER: A CASE TO POINT
Yesterday, in a lecture I was giving about issues relating to service of the claim form, I was asked to address the issue of “when is it sensible to apply for an extension of time for service of the claim…
CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN YOU TELL A WHOPPER THE FIRST TIME AROUND – IT COMES BACK TO BITE YOU IN A SECOND TRIAL
In McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd v Shirayama Shokusan Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 1133 (Ch) Mr Justice Edwin Johnson found that a company had misrepresented its intention at a trial which involved, essentially, the claimant’s right to a new tenancy of business…
REDUCING THE RISKS OF ADVERSE COSTS ORDERS IN CIVIL LITIGATION: WEBINAR 20th MAY 2024
A costs order against your client is always a painful event. This webinar looks at the best and safest means of litigating to avoid costs orders against a claimant. It covers areas relating to extensions of time, relief from sanctions…
COST BITES 150: WAS THIS A COMPLIANT STATUTE BILL (NO IT WASN’T): PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS BEWARE
In Hensley v Morris Law Ltd [2024] EWHC 1101 (SCCO) Costs Judge Rowley held that a bill provided by a claimant’s solicitor to their client was not a compliant bill. It is a judgment that emphasises the importance of the…
COST BITES 149: SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT – WERE THESE STATUTE BILLS? (YES THEY WERE)
In Pickering v Thomas Mansfield Solicitors Ltd [2024] EWHC 1107 (SCCO) Costs Judge Brown found that a series of invoices rendered by the defendant solicitors were “statute bills”. He rejected an argument that the requirements for such bills had been…
A HANDY TIP FOR ANYONE GOING TO THE LEEDS BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURT ON MONDAY: THEY HAVE MOVED…
HMCTS have sent out notice that from Monday 13 May 2024, the Business and Property Court in Leeds will being hearing cases at its new base in West Gate, Grace Street, Leeds. The fourth-floor suite houses four courtrooms and is…
COSTS – WHEN YOU SOMETIMES THINK THE WORLD HAS GONE MAD: SPEND £28,535 TO CHALLENGE AN ATE PREMIUM OF £392…
In Bendriss v Nicholson Jones Sutton Solicitors Ltd [2024] EWHC 1100 (SCCO) Costs Judge Rowley dismissed a claimant’s application for specific disclosure. One notable aspect of the application was that the claimant had spent £28,535 in respect of this one application in…
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER 2024 : WEBINAR 13th MAY 2024
The making of an early Part 36 offer can cause major problems for claimants and their lawyers. An understanding of the rules, the relevant cases and the steps that need to be taken when a Part 36 offer is made…
DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: AN APPLICATION TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION SHOULD BE DONE PROMPTLY
In Ibrahim v AXA Belgium [2024] EWHC 856 (KB) Master Fontaine refused the defendant’s application for an extension of time to dispute the jurisdiction. The defendant should have applied within 14 days of acknowledging service, it took 30. The defendant’s…
“GOOGLESPOOFING” AND THIRD PARTY DISCLOSURE: DEFENDANT FAILS TO PERSUADE THE COURT THAT RECORDINGS ARE NECESSARY
In Parker v Skyfire Insurance Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 1060 (KB) Mrs Justice Dias dismissed a defendant’s appeal against a refusal to give disclosure of documents of a third party car hire company. The documents were not necessary to dispose…
EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY TORTURE: THE JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE AND THE SUPREME COURT DECISION
The question of whether evidence obtained by torture in civil proceedings is one that, thankfully, rarely comes before the court. However it was an issue considered in the judgment of Mr Justice Knowles MBE In Shangang Shipping Company Ltd -v-…
IS A PARTY ENTITLED TO SEE THEIR OPPONENT’S CORRESPONDENCE WITH AN EXPERT LEADING UP TO THE JOINT MEETING? AN ISSUE THAT IS IMPORTANT – BUT UNDECIDED
In Frasers Group plc v Saxo Bank AS & Anor [2024] EWHC 188 (Comm) HHJ Pelling KC considered issues relating to whether a party’s correspondence with their expert leading up to the joint meeting of experts should be disclosed. The…
INCREASE IN COURT FEES FROM THE 1ST MAY 2024
Court fees increased from the 1st May. Details of all court fees increased can be seen here. The increases apply in family and tribunal proceedings in addition to civil cases. 172 court fees have been increased by 10%. Here we…
SILENCE IN THE FACE OF AN OFFER TO MEDIATE CAN HAVE AN IMPACT ON COSTS: ONCE AN OFFER TO MEDIATE IS MADE THE BALL IS IN THE RECIPIENT’S COURT
In Northamber PLC v Genee World Ltd & Ors (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 428 the Court of Appeal reiterated certain key points about a party refusing to mediate. Silence in the face of an offer to mediate can have an…
REMISSION TO THE COUNTY COURT: WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
In Sherman & Anor v Reader Offers Ltd (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 412 the Court of Appeal set out the limits that exist when a case is remitted to the county court for an assessment of damages following a successful…
ANOTHER PART 8 CASE THAT HAS TO GO TO PART 7: THE RISK THAT THE COURT WILL MAKE “ILL-INFORMED DECISIONS THAT WILL NOT FINALLY DISPOSE OF THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PARTIES”
In TClarke Contracting Ltd v Bell Build Ltd [2024] EWHC 992 (TCC) Mr Justice Pepperall decided that an action, commenced under Part 8, must proceed under Part 7. “In my judgment, the proposed use of the Part 8 procedure in…
You must be logged in to post a comment.