THE CAP ON RECOVERABLE COSTS OF COSTS BUDGETING IS EXCLUSIVE OF VAT: JUDGMENT TODAY
In Marbrow v Sharpes Garden Services Ltd [2020] EWHC B26 (Costs) Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker considered the issue of whether the cap on recoverable costs of the costs assessment process are inclusive, or exclusive of value added tax. (There are…
NEARLY LEGAL: JOHNNY DEPP: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SELF-PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER: “EVERY LITIGATION SOLICITOR IN THE COUNTRY SIGHS HEAVILY IN WEARY FAMILIARITY…”
A Tweet this evening, followed by a number of comments, causes me to repeat my advice on the necessity of the lawyer protecting themselves when drafting a witness statement on behalf of a client or witness. NEARLY LEGAL…
CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO AMEND CLAIM, OR INTRODUCE NEW EXPERT, WHERE APPLICATION TO ADJOURN BECAUSE OF COVID ALLOWED
In Ludlow -v- Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust & BMI Healthcare Ltd [2020] EWHC 1720 (QB) Mr Justice Jay allowed an application for an adjournment on the grounds that a trial could not take place remotely. However, he refused the claimant’s…
CIVIL EVIDENCE AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF: WHEN WHO BEARS THE BURDEN CAN HAVE A MAJOR EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF A CASE
The judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Emmanuel v Avison & Ors [2020] EWHC 1696 (Ch) contains some interesting observations about the burden of proof. The burden lay with the claimant, despite the fact that if different proceedings had been…
FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS, PART 36 AND “EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES”: A CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION
I am grateful to my colleague Erica Bedford for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Godsmark QC in Young -v- AXA Insurance UK Ltd, a copy of which is available here LN2018-15 Young v AXA Judgment as…
PART 36 CONSEQUENCES APPLY (IN PART) WHEN CLAIMANT MAKES AN OFFER OF A 0.3% DISCOUNT
In Rawbank SA v Travelex Banknotes Ltd [2020] EWHC 1619 (Ch) Mr Justice Zacaroli ordered that some of the consequences of Part 36 should apply when a claimant made an offer to settle a debt for a slightly reduced figure. …
APPLYING TO SUBSTITUTE A PARTY AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD: THE STATUTE AND THE RULES CONSIDERED
The rules relating to substituting a defendant after expiry of the limitation period are always a little intimidating. Particularly when trying to persuade a court to apply them. They were considered in detail in the judgment of Master Shuman in…
CLAIM AGAINST SOLICITORS WAS STATUTE BARRED: THAT SIX YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD MAY NOT ALWAYS START WHEN YOU THINK
It is surprising how many of the reported cases relating to mis-service of the claim form are professional negligence cases. It appears to be a common practice to run a case up to the end of the limitation period and,…
DEDUCTIONS FROM DAMAGES AND MITIGATION OF LOSS IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: WEBINAR 11th AUGUST 2020 (& THEN AVAILABLE ON DEMAND)
On the 11th August 2020 I am presenting a webinar “Deductions from Damages and Mitigation of Loss”. THE WEBINAR This webinar looks at those matters that could reduce the damages a claimant receives in a personal injury case, looking…
“MAY IT PLEASE YOU MADAM”: BOOK OF LEGAL HUMOUR BACK ON THE “SHELVES”
On two occasions in the past I have written about the the book “May it please you Madam” by retired District Judge Neil Hickman. This has led people to look for it, one reader even tracked down the author who…
ALLEGATIONS OF JUDICIAL BIAS REJECTED: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Ameyaw v McGoldrick & Ors [2020] EWHC 1787 (QB) Mrs Justice Steyn refused an application that she recuse herself. The first part of the judgment summarises the law in relation to bias when the judge knows the counsel involved….
THE NOT SO LONELY LITIGATOR’S CLUB 36: THE MUSICAL SECTION: SUSANNA WHAWELL: SAXOPHONE
I thought the Club was in need of some more woodwind players, and a widening of the scope of its membership. As the constitution allows I asked Susanna Whawell to join. Susanna is a Fellow of the Chartered Management Institute…
SERVICE OF CLAIM FORM VALID WHEN LEFT WITH RECEPTIONIST: A CAVITY IN THE DEFENDANT’S SUBMISSIONS
Some interesting points as to the validity of the service of the claim form were raised by the defendant in Bec Construction -v- Melt Hythe Limited [2020] EWHC 970 TCC. The defendant’s arguments were, however, to no avail. Mrs Justice…
WHEN SHOULD A SOLICITOR MAKE A WITNESS STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS? A REVIEW OF THE CASES
Last week I gave an in-house talk to a London firm of solicitors.* One of the matters we discussed was when (if ever) it was appropriate for a solicitor to make a witness statement in support of an interlocutory application. …
“OUR CASE WAS SO HOPELESS YOU SHOULD HAVE APPLIED TO STRIKE US OUT”: LOSING PARTY SHOULD PAY THE COSTS OF CLAIMANTS PURSUING SPECULATIVE CLAIM: YOU CAN’T HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT
The judgment of Mrs Justice Lambert today in Bailey & Anorv Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 1766 (QB) reflected the normal rule that the losing party should pay the costs of an action. In this case the losing party was…
CORONAVIRUS LAW: APPEAL ON POSSESSION ISSUES STAYED BY PD51Z: NO SALAMI SLICING OF CASES WHERE A LANDLORD IS SEEKING POSSESSION
In the judgment in TFS Stores Ltd v The Designer Retail Outlet Centres (Mansfield) General Partner Ltd & Ors[2020] EWCA Civ 833 the Court of Appeal (by a majority) stayed a number of appeals, holding that they were possession proceedings…
CLAIM STRUCK OUT, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED, COUNTERCLAIM CONTINUES: CLAIMANT HITS A BRICK WALL
In Edmunds v Newell & Anor [2020] EW Misc 7 (CC) HHJ Jarman QC refused a claimant’s application for relief from sanctions. The claim was struck out but the counterclaim continued. THE CASE The claimant claimed £110,599.99 plus interest…
NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER AND PART 36 BENEFITS APPLIED WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT HIS OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Scales v Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2020] EWHC 1749 (QB) Mr Justice Cavangh rejected the defendant’s submission that there should be an issue based costs order and awarded a claimant the usual Part 36 benefits when he beat his own…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING FAILURES ON DISCLOSURE: THE DEPP TRIAL IS BACK AFLOAT
Last week I wrote on the latest episode of the Depp case. Mr Justice Nicol held that there had been a failure to comply with a peremptory order on disclosure and the Mr Depp’s case stood struck out. Today it…
WOULD YOU BELIEVE IT? ANOTHER CASE WHEN CLAIM FORM WRONGLY SERVED : CLAIMANT “SERVED” ON SOLICITORS WHO DID NOT HAVE INSTRUCTIONS TO ACCEPT SERVICE
In the judgment in Gallagher v Hallows Associates [2020] EW Misc 7 (CC) HHJ Jarman QC found that a defendant had been wrongly served when it was sent to solicitors who did not state they had instructions to accept service. This…