COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 FIXED COSTS AND LATE ACCEPTANCE HEARD – DECISION PENDING (PLUS A FINAL PLUG FOR THE WEBINAR ON PART 36 ON THE 26th FEBRUARY 2026)
The Court of Appeal has heard an appeal against the decision in Laura Attersley v UK Insurance Limited [2025] EWHC 884 (KB). This is an interesting decision on Part 36. I understand that judgment is pending. This was one of many…
EXPERT WATCH 38: AN EXPERT HAD NOT BREACHED THEIR DUTY BY ACCEPTING LIMITED INSTRUCTIONS: BUT WHEN SHOULD AN EXPERT REFUSE INSTRUCTIONS?
Here we are considering some important observations in relation to the duties of an expert who is given limited instructions. The judge considered whether this involved a breach of the expert’s duty to the court. On the facts of this…
COST BITES 359: A SOLICITOR’S FAILURE TO SIGN THE COSTS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY DID NOT RENDER THE BILL INVALID (THIS MAY EXPLAIN WHY BIRMINGHAM COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE ANY MONEY…)
Here we have an appeal by a paying party on a highly technical point. The appeal failed. It highlights the dangers of (i) permitting a default certificate to be entered; (ii) taking technical points which (as the Court observed) led…
COST BITES 358: WHAT DOES THE COURT DO IF THE PARTIES HAVE COMPROMISED AN APPLICATION BUT CANNOT AGREE ON WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS?
There are occasions where the parties agree the terms of an application but cannot agree who should pay the costs – the court is asked to adjudicate. There are difficulties for the judge in this situation. In particular judges are…
MAZUR MATTERS 51: WHY THE HEARING IS NOT BEING “LIVESTREAMED”: A QUICK WORD FOR THE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS
The appeal in the decision of Mazur -v- Charles Russell Speechlys LLP continues today. There were (I am told) some 400 people watching remotely. This has not stopped a large number of people online putting forward (sometimes bizarre) theories as to…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 58: THE DEFENDANTS’ PLEADING DID NOT CONTAIN AN “ADMISSION”: APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AMENDMENTS DISMISSED
This is a case where the court had to consider whether a defence had originally contained an “admission” such that the defendants required express permission to resile from it. The court found that, on close analysis, there was no such…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A WITNESS STATEMENT “MADE UP OF SUBMISSIONS OR COMMENTARY ON DOCUMENTS RATHER THAN EVIDENCE”
There are numerous warnings and strictures about not putting submissions, commentary and opinion in witness statements. More than one observer has commented that these rules are routinely ignored. We have examples of this here. We also have an example of…
You must be logged in to post a comment.