CONTEMPT OF COURT (2): THE CHIEF CONSTABLE IS THE PERSON WHO COPS IT
We are continuing with the examination of the recent Court of Appeal decision on contempt of court. In particular who is the entity in “contempt”? This may have far reaching consequences, as well as being specific to the actions of…
MAZUR MATTERS 37: USEFUL LINKS: NEW GUIDANCE FROM THE LAW SOCIETY
The Law Society has earlier issued two new documents which are guides to Mazur. One is outside a paywall, the other is not. “Mazur – answering your questions” deals with many key issues. (Links are important on this topic -…
EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2025: THE CASES (AND THE LESSONS) CONSIDERED IN A WEBINAR ON THE 20th NOVEMBER 2025
This has been quite a year for experts in the courts. All kinds of mistakes and errors have been reported upon. These are expensive issues for litigants and sometimes for the experts involved. This webinar looks at cases relating to…
CONTEMPT OF COURT (1) CONTEMPT NEED NOT BE “CONTUMELIOUS” (WHATEVER THAT MEANS): WHY CHIEF CONSTABLES, CHIEF EXECUTIVES, MINISTERS OF STATE AND BOSSES EVERYWHERE NEED TO PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO LITIGATION
I am breaking down this important Court of Appeal decision into a number of parts. We have already looked at the judgment as to the numerous “misleading” witness statements that were filed. The Court of Appeal also makes important observations…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: “MISLEADING AND UNTRUE STATEMENTS… HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE COURT ON BEHALF OF THE CHIEF CONSTABLE” (COURT OF APPEAL ARE NOT HAPPY…)
This week we are looking at a remarkable case. Shortly before a matter was due to be heard in the Court of Appeal the respondent (the Chief Constable of a police force) filed documents which showed that numerous witness statements…
CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE BECOMES OPPRESSIVE: “THIS STRATEGY REFLECTS VERY POORLY ON THOSE INVOLVED IN ITS DEVISING AND EXECUTION”
Surveillance evidence can be a wholly legitimate strategy in litigation. However it can tip over into oppressive conduct, particularly if it serves no real purpose. We have such an example here where the judge was critical of the claimant’s conduct…
APPEAL STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF APPELLANTS’ FAILURE TO FILE A COMPLIANT BUNDLE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED
All those involved in the appeal process, indeed litigation generally, are best advised to read this judgment. It is about the standard the court’s expect when an appeal is being brought. It is also about procedural failures and failures to…
DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025
This year has see more than its fair share of cases relating to default, sanctions and wasted costs. Knowing what those cases are, the problems that arose, how they were caused and the results are essential skills for litigators. More…
COURT CONSIDERS APPLICATION FOR FURTHER DISCLOSURE MADE ON THE THIRD DAY OF THE TRIAL: “THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE MANY MONTHS BEFORE…”
It is unusual for an application for further disclosure, particularly extensive disclosure, to be made part way through a trial. The judge considered such an application in this case. This led to the obvious question – why wasn’t this application…
MAZUR MATTERS 36: UPDATED GUIDANCE FROM AN INSURER: THE NEW DUTIES ON THOSE WHO “SUPERVISE” – THEY NOW HAVE TO “CONDUCT”
Some of the most useful guidance on compliance and Mazur has come from insurers (perhaps unsurprisingly). It is significant that one of the major insurers has already updated and revised its guidance. This guidance is essential reading for anyone involved…
TALES FROM THE COST LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS (3): COSTS JUDGE SIMON BROWN ON THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF COSTS BUDGETING
Costs Judge Brown makes the point here that costs budgeting is here to stay. There are a few basic issues, the “nuts and bolts” of budgeting which help ensure that the whole process runs smoothly. (You can never underestimate the…
ANOTHER “BUNDLES” ISSUE: THE NEED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE PRACTICE DIRECTION ON THE CITATION OF AUTHORITIES; “I’M PICKING UP BAD CITATIONS” – THE REMIX…
It is often worthwhile looking at short judgments or comments at the end of a case, particularly in the Court of Appeal. They sometimes contain little gems of very useful information. We see that here in the short judgment of…
SERVICE POINTS 18: DECISION TODAY: THE CLAIMANT DID NOT ACTUALLY RECEIVE THE CLAIM FORM UNTIL AFTER IT EXPIRED, YET THE COURT OF APPEAL WAS UNYIELDING
We are continuing our examination of the Court of Appeal judgment today in relation to service of the claim form. The claimant’s solicitors received the claim form after the date it had expired. Nevertheless the Court of Appeal upheld the…
SERVICE POINTS 17: BREAKING NEWS… IMPORTANT DECISION ON THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THE CLAIM FORM FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY
The procedural problems caused by service of the claim form continue unabated. Here we look at a decision of the Court of Appeal today which highlights the very real dangers for claimants. Mistakes or delays by the court service may…
MAZUR MATTERS 35: DOES AN UNAUTHORISED PERSON SIGNING AN APPLICATION MEAN IT CAN BE STRUCK OUT “WITHOUT MORE”?
Here we are looking at case report which contains a reference to Mazur and appears to suggest that signature of an application by an unauthorised person means that the application is “liable to be struck out”. As it turns out…
COST BITES 307: DOES A FINDING THAT AN APPELLANTS HAD ACTED UNREASONABLY BELOW, AND SHOULD PAY COSTS, MEAN THAT THEY SHOULD ALSO PAY THE COSTS OF AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL
Here we have a case where a party was ordered to pay costs because it acted unreasonably in bringing an application, even though the tribunal in question was normally “cost-neutral”. That party then appealed the costs order and the appeal…
COST BITES 306: ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD TOOK CIRCUMSTANCES OUT OF THE NORM: INSURER ORDERED TO PAY INDEMNITY COSTS TO THE CLAIMANT
Here we look at a case where the judge found that the defendant’s conduct in alleging fraud was such that costs should be ordered on the indemnity basis. Among other things this judgment reminds us of the dangers of alleging…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 36: A “SCATTERGUN” APPROACH DOES NOT HELP THE CLAIMANTS’ CASE (NOR DOES FAILING TO PLEAD KEY ASSERTIONS OF BREACH AND DAMAGES…)
A “scattergun” approach is rarely wise in relation to allegations in pleadings. Here, however we have a case where the judge found that there was both a scattergun approach and a failure to plead in relation to key matters of liability…
TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 2: (MIS) CONDUCT IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS
Staying with the conference today. Costs Judge Leonard gave an interesting talk on “conduct” in the assessment process which he, said was more accurately about “misconduct in the assessment process. (This was one of Judge Leonard’s slides. It highlights the…
TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 1 : MAZUR ISSUES: WAS IT CORRECTLY DECIDED? WHY IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COST LAWYERS ARE REGULATED
Today I am writing directly from the Association of Costs Lawyers conference in London. Unsurprisingly the first two speakers considered Mazur. This is a highly abbreviated version of their talks. ANDREW ROY KC Andrew, kindly referring to this blog as…
MAZUR MATTERS 34: “LEGAL EXECUTIVES” AND THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT LITIGATION AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION PAPER FROM 2010: ANOTHER PIECE OF THE “HOW HAS THIS HAPPENED”? JIGSAW
We have, in the past few months, been addressing issues that arise from a statute passed some 18 years ago. The issues in relation to the obligation of solicitors and authorised persons (and only solicitors and authorised persons) to conduct litigation…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 35: THE DEFENDANTS’ ARGUMENT THAT THEY COULD RUN A PARTICULAR ARGUMENT ON THE BASIS OF THE CURRENT PLEADINGS WAS “NOTHING MORE THAN WISHFUL THINKING” (OR PERHAPS TANGERINE DREAMING)
Here we are looking at a pleadings issue that arose in the Intellectual Property Patents Court. The scientific issues here may be complex, however the rules remain the same. The judge found that that the defendants’ pleaded case did not…
“LITIGANTS IN PERSON SHOULD BE WARY OF UNQUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS WHO ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEFEND OR PURSUE CASES BY REFERENCE TO SPURIOUS LEGAL ARGUMENTS, WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE”
It is rare for this blog to look at judgments from other jurisdictions. However some words from the High Court of Ireland caught my eye. It offers advice, in particular, to litigants in person. (This is not a warning in…
THE CLAIMANT RELIED ON A FALSE AUTHORITY: THE CONTEXT OF THIS CASE MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR THE LITIGANT TO CHECK THE CITATION
We are looking again at the phenomenon of “false” authorities. However in this case the courts were more forgiving of the litigant who had relied on a non-existent case. The judgment does, however, show the need for care in legal…
PROVING THINGS 273: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT: IT “BEGGARS BELIEF” THAT THE DEFENDANT DID NOT KNOW OF THE RELEVANT MATTERS
Here we look at a case where the Court of Appeal overturned the trial judge’s findings of fact at trial. Usually this is difficult, or the court acts with some reticence, here the Court uses the phrase “it beggars belief”…
MAZUR MATTERS 33: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (2): THE LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE
We continue with our rare trip inside the Houses of Parliament by looking at the response that the Minister for Courts and Legal Services to the letter from the Chair of the Justice Committee. (We are seeing how Mazur…
DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025: LOOKING AT MISTAKES IN LITIGATION TO AVOID REPEATS NEXT YEAR…
It is that time of year when we can look back and reflect on events of the previous 12 months. Here we are looking at what lessons can be learnt from cases on default and sanctions since November 2024. As…
MAZUR MATTERS 32: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (1): THE LETTER FROM THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE TO THE MINISTER
It is rare for there to be Parliamentary consideration of the matters discussed in this blog. Quite often we are trying to divine what it is that Parliament actually meant when it drafted a statute. In the Mazur case Parliament…
COST BITES 305: THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO AWARD COSTS AGAINST A PARTY WHEN TWO ACTIONS WERE “JOINED” AND NOT “CONSOLIDATED”: AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION IN THE RULES
We are looking at a case where the appellant was successful in overturning an award for costs made against him in relation to one set of proceedings. The judgment highlights the important distinction between “joinder” and “consolidation”. That distinction can…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: DISTILLING THE GESTMIN GUIDELINES: WHICH WITNESS WILL BE BELIEVED? (AND WHAT PART OF THEIR EVIDENCE ACCEPTED?)
Over the past month or so there have been at least half a dozen cases where the judge references Gestmin – the consideration and guidance given to judicial fact finding, particularly in relation to witness evidence. These range from actions…
MAZUR MATTERS 31: THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD REVIEW OF “WHY MAZUR WAS A SURPRISE” – AND WHAT CHANGED AFTERWARDS?
The Legal Services Board has set out the scope of its review of “advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies”. Stripped down to its basics the question being asked…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 34: APPEAL ALLOWED (IN PART) WHERE TRIAL JUDGE AWARDED DAMAGES BASED ON UNPLEADED ALLEGATIONS
Here we have a case where the claimants’ case was based (in part) on conduct by one of the defendants that was not pleaded. The defendant appealed on that basis. On appeal the judge was not persuaded by the respondents’…
DEFENCES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: SHOULD RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS BE GRANTED?
Here we look at a case where the defendants failed to comply with a peremptory order for disclosure. The defences stood struck out. The issue the judge had to determine was whether relief from sanctions should be granted. This in…
COST BITES 304: “NEGLIGENCE” HAS A PARTICULAR MEANING IN A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION: THERE MUST BE “SOMETHING AKIN TO AN ABUSE OF PROCESS”.
The judgment here considers what is meant by “negligent” when wasted costs are sought against a legal representative. The review of the authorities makes it clear that it has a specific meaning. (There is a Lord Denning judgment where he…
COST BITES 304: IN A DISPUTED WILL CASE WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS? WHAT SHOULD THE BASIS OF THE ORDER BE? SHOULD THERE BE AN INTERIM ORDER FOR COSTS?
There are particular rules that relate to costs in probate proceedings. Here we look at a decision on costs that is of more general interest. The judge considered the issue of whether the unsuccessful defendant should pay the costs, the…
MAZUR MATTERS 30: BREAKING NEWS: LEGAL SERVICES BOARD GRANTS CILEX’S APPLICATION FOR STAND ALONE LITIGATION RIGHTS
The Legal Services Board has today approved an application from CILEx Regulation to allow legal executives to obtain standalone litigation practice rights. Here we have the announcement and the Decision Notice. The finer detail will be considered when it becomes…
SERVICE POINTS 16: DID THE COURT HAVE POWER TO STATE THAT SERVICE OF A CLAIM FORM AT THE HOUSE COMMONS COULD BE RATIFIED RETROSPECTIVELY?
We have already looked at this case at first instance, see Service Points 9, the initial decision was considered by the Court of Appeal in the case we look at here. The Court here was concerned with whether the courts…
MAZUR MATTERS 29: MORE USEFUL LINKS: THE FOIL RESPONSE
Here we are looking at another useful link. FOIL (the Federation of Insurance Lawyers) has produced a document dealing with the potential consequences of Mazur for its members. (FOIL has always been such a clever name. This link shows that…
SOLICITORS HAD GOOD GROUNDS TO TERMINATE THEIR RETAINER BUT COULD NOT RECOVER THEIR FEES: A LOT TO THINK ABOUT HERE.
Here we are looking at a case where an action for negligence against a firm of solicitors failed. The trial judge found that the solicitors had good grounds to terminate their retainer. However the solicitors’ counterclaim for fees failed. There…
COST BITES 303: THE SOLICITOR CANNOT PASS ON RESPONSIBILITY FOR A DEFECTIVE BILL TO THE COSTS LAWYER: A 75% REDUCTION BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE BILL WAS DRAFTED
Here we are looking at a case involving a bill of costs that was wholly defective that the costs judge was invited to strike it out. The judge came very close, but reduced the bill by 75% instead. There…
You must be logged in to post a comment.