“BUILD IT AND WHO CARES IF THEY COME”: THE REGISTER ON WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE COURT RULES AND LISTING ONLINE: THE ABSENCE OF “SCHOOL-GRADE WEB SKILLS”
An interesting explanation of why practitioners, and others, are having problems with access to rules of court and listing can be found in The Register – which provides news on technology for I T Professionals. The Register reports that the…
AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT”: NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
The issue of non-payment, or under-payment, of court fees was considered by the Court of Appeal in the judgment today in Butters & Anor v Hayes [2021] EWCA Civ 252. THE CASE During the course of an action the court…
THE RULES ARE BACK IN TOWN: ASKING WHERE THEY COULD BE FOUND…
After some, shall we say “adverse”, comments on the way that the Civil Procedure Rules are presented on the government website the “old” site has has been given a reprieve. ON THE JUSTICE WEBSITE The Rules are still available…
![WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: "DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE"](https://i2.wp.com/www.civillitigationbrief.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/balalaika_garmon_shepherds_horn.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: “DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE”
The judgment of Mrs Justice Moulder in PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors [2021] EWHC 411 (Comm) provides a further example of the contention that obtaining witness evidence is probably not part of the “stock in trade” of those who…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 91: MAKE SURE YOUR CLIENT IS STILL ALIVE WHEN YOU ISSUE – AT CERTAINLY AT THE TIME OF TRIAL: A SITUATION THAT IS UTTERLY BIZARRE
The facts in Amirtharaja & Anor v White & Anor [2021] EWHC 330 (Ch) are unusual to say the least. Someone who had died two years prior to issue was included as a party in a claim form. The matter…
I WILL WALK 150 MILES: MARCHING AGAINST CANCER IN MARCH…
There are few families, or workplaces, that are unaffected by cancer. Cancer Research UK is organising “Walk All Over Cancer”. Walking 10,000 a steps a day in March. HOW MANY STEPS IS THAT? It adds up. According to the…
DAMAGES AND THE SCHEDULE OF DAMAGES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 4th MARCH 2021
This webinar on the 4th March 2021 is part of the Avoiding Pitfalls series. It looks at rules and practice relating to drafting and proving damages in personal injury cases. The webinar considers schedules of damages and proving damages with…
PROVING THINGS 204: WHY FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE IS IMPORTANT: “THE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE… IS TO BE PREFERRED OVER THOSE WHO GAVE EVIDENCE FOR THE BANK”
In Lynch v Cadwallader & Anor [2021] EWHC 328 (Ch) Chief Insolvency Court Judge Briggs considered the Gestmin principles in a case where a bank failed to establish that a client had signed a guarantee. It is a good example…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 90: APPEALS, RESPONDENT’S NOTICES AND DENTON
The Court of Appeal judgment in Unite the Union v Alec McfAdden [2021] EWCA Civ 199 highlights the needs for a party, responding to an appeal, to file a Respondent’s Notice if it wants to argue there are additional, or…
ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL-HEALTH: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT HEARING SHOULD GO AHEAD: A TRIAL SHOULD BE “FAIR IN ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES”
“Applying for an adjournment on the grounds of ill health” is a common (indeed one of the most common) search terms that leads people to this blog. It is unusual to see a Court of Appeal decision on this issue….
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 89: THE 2% CAP ON COSTS BUDGETING: SOMETHING TO WATCH OUT FOR
Some draft orders for CCMCs I have seen recently included, towards the end a provision for the 2% cap on the budgeting process to be be applied. Anyone faced with such a draft should point to the provisions of CPR…
ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL IS A “LAST RESORT” (AND WILL RARELY OCCUR BECAUSE OF INABILITY OF SPECIFIC COUNSEL TO ATTEND)
The judgment of Mr Justice Fordham in Naylor v University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 340 (QB) shows the difficulty of obtaining an adjournment of a trial date. The judge rejected an application on the grounds of…
“Closing argument was in writing: an eye-glazing, bum-numbing, disc-herniating total of 662 pages (single-spaced, medium-sized font and heavily footnoted)”: A good time to repeat one of our favourite cases…
Periodically I feel bound to remind people of the case of The Hearing Clinic (Niagara Falls) Inc -v- Ontario Ltd, Lewis & Lewis 2014 ONAC 5831 (CanLii) a decision of Mr Justice J.W.Quinn. In the middle of “lockdown”, when we may well…
“TOPSY TURVY STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION”: THE CORONAVIRUS ACT DOES NOT ALLOW THE BROADCASTING OF THE COURTS
In Good Law Project Ltd & Ors, R. ( On Application of) v Secretary of State for Health And Social Care [2021] EWHC 346 (Admin) Mr Justice Chamberlain rejected an argument that the Coronavirus Act implicitly gave the courts power…
WHERE HAVE ALL THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES GONE? (2): A LONG TIME MAY NOT BE PASSING (AND SOME – MAYBE NOT SO USEFUL – LINKS)
As an update on the decision to move the online version of the Civil Procedure Rules. David Wolfson QC, (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice) tweeted yesterday that the problem had been recognised “I’ve asked my officials to look at…
WHEN YOUR PLEADED CASE IS DIFFERENT TO YOUR EVIDENCE: YOU ARE TAKING A HUGE GAMBLE (WHICH DIDN’T PAY OFF…)
The judgment of Gavin Mansfield QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Puharic v Silverbond Enterprises Ltd [2021] EWHC 351 (QB) highlights the difficulties that can occur if the pleaded case differs from the evidence. Put bluntly running a…
THE TORT OF “BRINGING PROCEEDINGS FOR AN IMPROPER PURPOSE”: MAY STILL BE ALIVE, BUT NOT VERY WELL…
The judgment of Andrew Lenon QC in Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 325 (Ch) contains a detailed consideration of the tort of “bringing proceedings for an improper purpose”. This tort (may well) still exist, however…
WHERE HAVE ALL THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES GONE? WHEN WILL THEY EVER LEARN?
From the day this blog started there has always been a link to the Civil Procedure Rules. These were available, in an easily accessible form, on the Ministry of Justice website. They may still be there – but not for…
A “WHOLLY UNRELIABLE” WITNESS IS NOT NECESSARILY A DISHONEST ONE: ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDMENTAL DISHONESTY NOT ACCEPTED BY JUDGE
In Brint v Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 290 (QB) HHJ Platts (sitting as a High Court Judge) rejected the defendant’s case that a witness who was “wholly unreliable” was also fundamentally dishonest. “Failing…
CONTRACTUAL CLAIM FOR COSTS CONSTRUED AS BEING COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS
In Criterion Buildings Ltd v McKinsey & Company Inc (United Kingdom) & Anor [2021] EWHC 314 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) rejected a paying party’s argument that it did not have to pay the costs…
