LOOKING BACK ELEVEN YEARS – THE LAST POST: LAWYERS LOOKING AFTER OURSELVES
This week we have looked back at some of the consistent topics on this blog over the past 11 years: expert evidence; witness statements; proving things, among them. I could have added many others: Part 36; service (or non-service) of…
CHOOSING ONE POST FROM THE “PROVING THINGS” SERIES: CLAIMANTS SEEK SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGES – BUT RECOVER £2.00
As part of the looking back series this week I have chosen a case from the “Proving things” series in June 2017. The post looked at the judgment of HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Jones -v- Oven…
WITNESS STATEMENTS DRAFTED BY LAWYERS: ANOTHER LOOK BACK
Yesterday I wrote about the large numbers of posts about expert witnesses on this blog. These are probably matched by the cases that deal with judicial criticism of witness statements. Again this is a topic where, in choosing one post,…
IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO USE PART 11 WHEN CHALLENGING A TRADE UNION’S RIGHT TO BRING AN ACTION FOR DEFAMATION
In Prospect v Evans [2024] EWHC 1533 (KB) Mrs Justice Steyn held that a challenge to a trade union’s right to bring defamation proceedings should not have been made by using Part 11. Part 11 applications deal with jurisdiction. The…
EXPERT EVIDENCE: AN EXAMPLE OF AN EXPERT BEING UNBALANCED (FROM 2015).
Looking back at previous posts there are, numerous, indeed hundreds, where the courts have considered the role of experts. The cases that appear on this blog tend to be where judges have found the experts wanting. It almost feels unfair…
EXPERT EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL STATE WHY THE JUDGE SHOULD BE WARY OF RELYING ON SCIENTIFIC PAPERS
In D and A (Fact-Finding : Research Literature) [2024] EWCA Civ 663 the Court of Appeal set out a clear warning about the dangers of trial judges analysing research literature in detail. The literature should be read through the prism…
THE ELEVENTH ANNIVERSARY OF CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF: A LOOK BACK TO THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY
Today marks the 11th anniversary of the setting up of this blog. Rather than review the previous decade I thought it would be a good time to repeat what I said on the first anniversary. The growth and size of…
ANOTHER BLOG FROM THE PAST: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “EVIDENCE” AND “SUBMISSIONS”: A PROBLEM THAT PERSISTS TODAY
As part of the 11th anniversary process I am looking at a blog that was written in June 2014. “WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE FOR FACTS: KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS (AND WHY IT MATTERS)”. It is very interesting to…
SUING THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE
Next week marks the 11th anniversary of this blog. I am reviewing key posts from the past. This was the second ever post on the 25th June 2013. The issues remain relevant. I have issued periodical reminders about this issue…
THE JUDGE HAD ADJOURNED THE HANDING DOWN OF A JUDGMENT AND RETAINED A DISCRETION OVER PERMISSION TO APPEAL: AN ISSUE LIKE LONDON BUSES – TWO ARRIVE ALMOST AT ONCE
I cannot recall a case where, in the space of a week, there have been two cases about the circumstances in which a trial judge can give permission to appeal after judgment has been handed down. The second for the…
A SHORT PLEADING POINT: PLEADING FRAUD – A BLAST FROM THE PAST
I can’t think of any other case where this blog has featured a case that was decided prior to the introduction of the Civil Procedure Rules. However the judgment in Rigby v Decorating Den Systems Ltd [1999] EWCA Civ 986…
COST BITES 157: AGREEMENT AS TO COSTS BETWEEN CLIENT AND SOLICITOR WAS CONTRACTUALLY BINDING: APPLICATION FOR SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT STRUCK OUT
NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED IN AN APPEAL BY CONSENT. SEE THE POST ON THE 8th JULY 2025 I am grateful to my colleague Kevin Latham for drawing my attention to the decision of Mr Justice Eyre in Holcroft v…
THE HIGH COURT DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO HEAR AN APPEAL FROM A CIRCUIT JUDGE WHEN THAT DECISION WAS ITSELF AN APPEAL: DECISION ON THIS POINT
It is always important to remember that appeals from Circuit Judges, which are themselves a decision made on appeal, can only be heard by the Court of Appeal. In Jarvis v Metro Taxis Ltd [2024] EWHC 1452 (KB) Mr Justice…
HOW THE DEFENDANT MANAGED TO MISS TIME FOR APPEALING: THE IMPORTANCE OF APPLYING TO THE ORIGINAL JUDGE, AND AGREEING A DRAFT ORDER PROMPTLY
We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Sweeting in Elbanna v Clark (Re Consequential Matters) [2024] EWHC 1471 (KB). The defendant sought permission to appeal. However by virtue of attempting to appeal to the Court of Appeal, thereby…
CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER ON LIABILITY NOT EFFECTIVE WHEN CAUSATION WAS STILL AT LARGE: NOT AN EFFECTIVE TRY
In Elbanna v Clark (Re Consequential Matters) [2024] EWHC 1471 (KB) Mr Justice Sweeting found that a claimant’s Part 36 offer to accept 75% of liability was too ambiguous to be effective when issues of causation were also to be…
IS ANYTHING IMPORTANT HAPPENING ON THE 4TH JULY? WEBINAR ON CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE – RECENT CASES
There is a danger that this webinar may be overshadowed by other events on the day. This webinar considers the law and practice in relation to contributory negligence. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR The webinar considers the…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ISSUES ONE: WHEN CAN YOU (AND WHEN MUST YOU) SERVE ON A NOMINATED SOLICITOR?
There has not been a case on (mis)service of the claim form on this blog for 14 days now. It may be an appropriate time to go back to one of the problem areas – service on a solicitor. There…
WHEN THE JUDGE PREFERS ONE EXPERT WITNESS OVER ANOTHER: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE EXAMPLE
In Woods v Doncaster And Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2024] EWHC 1432 (KB) Mrs Justice Lambert preferred the claimant’s expert evidence to that that of the defendant. This was not because either expert was unduly partisan. Rather it…
WHEN SHOULD A PART 20 DEFENDANT BE LIABLE TO PAY THE PART 20 CLAIMANT’S COSTS OF DEFENDING THE MAIN ACTION? THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED
In Alison Healey (Widow And Executrix of the Estate of Simon Andrew Healey, Deceased) v Mr Daniel McgRath [2024] EWHC 1360 (KB) Dexter Dias KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered the question of whether it was appropriate…
TALES FROM THE LEGAL ACTION GROUP HOUSING LAW CONFERENCE (II): PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS AND THE HOUSING LAWYER’S DILEMMA
At the Housing Law Conference last Friday I had the pleasure of meeting, and lecturing with, one of the doyenne’s of housing law, Giles Peaker, author of the “Nearly Legal” blog on housing law. Naturally I was pleased to leave…
STATEMENTS OF CASE AND AMENDMENTS: A ROLLERCOASTER OF A CASE: ISSUE OF AMENDMENT REMITTED TO COUNTY COURT
It is too easy, in fact far too easy, to describe the case of Idziak v Merlin Entertainments PLC [2024] EWHC 1351 (KB) as a “rollercoaster”. It involves the claimant being injured on a fairground ride. The claimant succeeded at…
APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS JUDGE’S REFUSAL TO RELY ON OWN EXPERT WHEN HE DID NOT AGREE WITH THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT: THE “STAGGERED APPROACH” IS IMPORTANT
In Seneschall v Trisant Foods Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1380 (Ch) Mr Justice Adam Johnson overturned a decision whereby a party was refused permission to rely on their own expert report. The judgment is important because it emphasises the…
UNCONTROVERTED EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO OVERRIDE THE UNQUESTIONED REPORT: GRIFFITHS -v- TUI LEADS TO CLAIMANTS BEING SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL
I am grateful to Jatinder Paul from Irwin Mitchell for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Humphreys in the Wrexham County Court. The report involves a personal injury case alleging negligence which led to food poisoning which…
TALES FROM THE LEGAL ACTION GROUP HOUSING LAW CONFERENCE (1): BUNDLES (OF COURSE): WHERE DO EXHIBITS TO WITNESS STATEMENTS GO IN THE TRIAL BUNDLE?
I spent last Friday slightly outside my comfort zone lecturing at the Legal Action Group Housing Law Conference, some aspects of which will feature in future blog posts. Needless to say all the housing lawyers were lovely and I went…
FATAL ACCIDENT ACT DAMAGES: THE DANGERS WHEN A JUDGE DOES NOT FOLLOW THE ESTABLISHED APPROACH: CLAIMANT’S APPEAL AGAINST “OFF PISTE” METHODOLOGY ALLOWED
In Price v Marston’s PLC [2024] EWHC 1352 (KB) Mr Justice Griffiths overturned a trial judge’s assessment of fatal accident damages because there was a failure to follow long established principles of calculation of loss. The case is an important…
COST BITES 156: COSTS BUDGETING WAS APPROPRIATE IN THE CASE OF A SERIOUSLY INJURED CHILD: IT HELPS THE CLAIMANT AS MUCH AS THE DEFENDANT
I am grateful to PJ Kirby KC for sending me a copy of the judgment of Master Brown in the case of PXT -v- Atere-Roberts [2024] EWHC 1372 (KB), a copy of which is available here Judgment PXT final 6…
COST BITES 155: HOW PARTICULAR SHOULD POINTS OF DISPUTE BE? AINSWORTH PRINCIPLES APPLY TO INTERPARTES ASSESSMENTS
In Wazen v Khan [2024] EWHC 1083 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered the question of how detailed and particularised points of dispute have to be. In particular whether the principles in Ainsworth v Stewarts Law LLP [2020] EWCA Civ…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY COST CLAIMANT £325,000 IN DEFENCE COSTS EVEN AFTER THE CLAIM HAD BEEN DISCONTINUED
I am grateful to Louise Jackson from Clyde & Co for drawing my attention to her piece about a recent settlement in a case where fundamental dishonesty was alleged. This is not a case that got to trial. However it…
WEBINAR ON STATEMENTS OF CASE, DRAFTING, DANGERS AND PITFALLS: 14th JUNE 2024
This blog has looked at many cases where the courts have been critical of the way in which statements of case have been drafted. On the 14th June there is a webinar on the importance of accurate drafting, coupled with…
UPDATE ON PREVIOUS POST: SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS REDUCED BY 25% BECAUSE THEY REFUSED TO CONSIDER MEDIATION
Following the previous post about the judgment of HHJ Mithani KC in Conway v Conway & Anor (Rev1) [2024] EW Misc 19 (CC) there is an interesting post about the subsequent decision of costs. This is on Linked In by…
BARNS, EVIDENCE, DOCUMENTS AND MEDIATION: A LOT TO THINK ABOUT HERE
There are some interesting observations about both evidence and mediation in the judgment of HHJ Mithani KC in Conway v Conway & Anor (Rev1) [2024] EW Misc 19 (CC). “One matter that seriously concerns me is why the Defendants…
You must be logged in to post a comment.