RESPONDENTS ALLOWED TO COMMENT AT HEARING : NEVERTHELESS SURVIVES A COSTS ORDER ON APPEAL
In Bhogal & Anor v Knight [2018] EWHC 2952 (Ch) the appellants failed in their appeal following an order that the respondent pay the costs of their initial application. The procedure described in the judgment is instructive. It was yet another…
REVEALING THE TRUE IDENTITY OF A WITNESS IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: APPLICATION FOR ANONYMITY SCUTTLED
In the judgment today in Suez Fortune Investments Ltd & Anor v Talbot Underwriting Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2929 (Comm) Mr Justice Teare allowed an application by the defendants that the true identity of a witness be disclosed. The witness…
EXTENSIVE WITNESS EVIDENCE THAT WAS OF NO USE: A COMMON FINDING
We have already looked at the judgment of Mrs Justice Cockerill in Recovery Partners GP Ltd & Anor v Rukhadze & Ors [2018] EWHC 2918 (Comm). It is worth looking at what the judge had to say about the witness evidence before…
UNDERSTANDING THE CODED LANGUAGE OF THE LEGAL DIRECTORIES: HUMBLEBRAGS AND BEYOND
This if the time of year that several legal directories are published. It leads to an inevitable pattern of behaviour. Thanks to law lecturer John Bates we can all now understand the coded language of the legal directory. THE PATTERN…
JUDGES: SOME COURTS DO HAVE ‘EM: MISSIVES FROM THE BENCH: “IT MUST HAVE BEEN A VERY SHORT JOURNEY”
There has been a recent trend on Twitter for people to share their “favourite” moments of intervention from the bench. Here is an edited collection (there is talk of these going into a book to raise money for charity). “DJ…
THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: WHY YOU AND YOUR CLIENTS NEED REGULAR REMINDERS OF THE RULES & CASES
In Recovery Partners GP Ltd & Anor v Rukhadze & Ors [2018] EWHC 2918 (Comm) Mrs Justice Cockerill made some important observations that apply to every aspect of litigation. We looked at the case yesterday: a stark reminder was provided of the dangers…
ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 5: IF YOU DON’T PAY COSTS BEFORE ISSUE IT COULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE AFTERWARDS
I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the High Court decision in Ayton -v- RSM Bentley Bennison & Ors [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB). It is one of those cases that illustrate…
THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: THE COURTS SAY IT AGAIN – NOT TO BE TAKEN LIGHTLY
In Recovery Partners GP Ltd & Anor v Rukhadze & Ors [2018] EWHC 2918 (Comm) Mrs Justice Cockerill provides a clear and stark reminder of the significance of the statement of truth and need for all relevant parties to sign it….
YOU’RE FIRED: A LITIGATOR ON THE APPRENTICE 6: SOMEWHAT DOWN AT HEEL: “BASICALLY – ITS JUST A LOT OF FANCY BOLLOCKS FOR SOME SHOES”
Our lawyers have yet to the decent thing and get fired. Both were in the losing team this week. Their entire team got called back in to get fired. Both survived. Their fancy high heeled shoe was beaten by a…
WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: 10 KEY POINTS THAT LITIGATORS SHOULD KNOW: A JUDGE MAKE GET A BIT IRKED IF YOU TRY TO USURP THEIR ROLE
The post earlier today on the deficiencies in a witness statement that led to it being excluded provides a good opportunity to reprise certain key points. Not only was the excluded statement essentially “commentary” and “opinion” it also failed to…
WITNESS STATEMENT EXCLUDED BECAUSE IT WAS OF NO USE: THE DANGERS OF NOT KNOWING THE RULES RELATING TO WITNESS EVIDENCE
I have noted, many times, on this blog the dangerous tendency of some practitioners to conflate witness statements with submissions. Witness statements express opinions, comments on documents and the law and do not give the source of information and belief. …
COURT CLOSURES: THE HUMAN COSTS: WATCH THE MOVIE
Suffolk Law Centre has produced a short video, available on Youtube, to highlight the human impact of court closures. THE VIDEO The video shows the human cost (and the actual cost) of travelling to court centres that are now a…
PROVING THINGS 131: IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE THE COURT SHOULD NOT DRAW INFERENCES IN SOLICITOR’S COSTS CASE
The judgment in Gill v Heer Manak Solicitors [2018] EWHC 2881 (QB) is one of those cases that will get costs lawyers excited. However it is not so much a case about costs as a case about evidence, or the absence…
TRYING TO APPEAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: IT IS VERY DIFFICULT – AND THE TCC IS NO DIFFERENT TO OTHER COURTS
Lord Justice Coulson used the judgment in Wheeldon Brothers Waste Ltd v Millennium Insurance Company Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 2403 to remind (some) litigators of some key principles in relation to appeals on findings of fact. He emphasised that the Technology…
COSTS REDUCED BY 25% : SEPARATE COSTS OF CLAIM AND COUNTERCLAIM: INCREASED COSTS WHEN LITIGATING AGAINST A LITIGANT IN PERSON
In Bank St Petersburg PJSC & Anor v Arkhangelsky & Ors [2018] EWHC 2817 (Ch) Mr Justice Hildyard considered the appropriate costs order after a lengthy trial. THE CASE There has been a lengthy trial (between February – July 2016) where…
“PUT BLUNTLY THESE ARGUMENTS ARE MISCONCEIVED”: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT IN A VERY ROBUST MOOD OVER COSTS
In Kay, R (On the Application Of) v Scan-Thors (UK) Ltd & Anor (Costs) [2018] EWHC 2842 (Admin) the Divisional Court dealt robustly with arguments made by an interested party attempting to resist an order for costs. “Put bluntly, these submissions…
LITIGATOR’S HALLOWEEN SPECTRES OF 2018: THAT STUFF YOU GET FROM “THE OTHER SIDE”
Last year we looked at those things that caused litigators stress and fear. This year we are looking at annoying things from “the other side”. That can mean from beyond the grave, or those people who are instructed to represent…
PROVING THINGS 130: BY THE TIME OF TRIAL YOU SHOULD REALLY KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE LOST: SOME OF THESE CLAIMANTS MAY HAVE SUFFERED NO LOSS AT ALL
The final paragraphs of the judgment in Anderson & Ors v Sense Network Ltd [2018] EWHC 2834 shows that some of the claimants in that case were unable to establish their losses. Indeed two of the claimants may have suffered no…
BREXIT AND…. ACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES FOR COURT HEARINGS: THE COURT IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP
The judgment in AIG Europe Ltd & Anor, Re [2018] EWHC 2818 (Ch) has already been the subject of some consternation, starting as it does with the words ” This case concerns the reorganisation of a major insurance company to prepare…
NON COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS: STRIKING OUT; LATE ATTEMPTS TO COMPLY; LATE “ACCEPTANCE” OF PART 36 OFFERS AND NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE
In Devoy-Williams -v- High Cartwright & Amin [2018] EWHC 2815 (Ch) Mrs Justice Falk upheld a decision that an action was struck out and that relief from sanctions should not be granted. It is a reminder (amongst other things) of…
ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 4: THE SCOPE OF THE SOLICITOR’S RETAINER: TURN DOWN AN OFFER OF £500,000 AND LOSE – THREE TIMES
In Lyons v Fox Williams LLP [2018] EWCA Civ 2347 the Court of Appeal turned down the claimant’s appeal. The claimant had been unsuccessful in an action for professional negligence against a firm of solicitors. He was equally unsuccessful on appeal….
YOU’RE FIRED: A LITIGATOR ON THE APPRENTICE 5: BODYBUILDING IN BIRMINGHAM: MASSAGING THE NUMBERS
This week the teams were involved in selling goods and services at a bodybuilding expo in Birmingham. Our two lawyers are on the same team and this week it was the winning team. Lawyers and bodybuilding, it seems, are a…
TRYING TO SNEAK EXPERT EVIDENCE INTO A WITNESS STATEMENT: PEOPLE MIGHT NOTICE: DEFENDANT’S ATTEMPT TO EXHIBIT EXPERTS STRUCK OUT
There have been numerous cases in which parties have attempted to give expert evidence in witness statements. Another example can be seen in the decision in New Media Distribution Company Sezc Ltd v Kagalovsky [2018] EWHC 2742 (Ch). An attempt to…
WITNESS STATEMENTS AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: DO YOU KNOW ABOUT CPR 32.5(4): “LATE EVIDENCE” SHOULD BE HARD TO ADDUCE
In the judgment today in The Catholic Child Welfare Society (Diocese of Middlesbrough) & Ors v CD [2018] EWCA Civ 2342 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against a claimant being successful in a Section 33 application. There is an…
CASE MANAGEMENT HEARING: SHOULD WE STAY OR SHOULD WE GO? PROCEEDINGS NOT DELAYED BECAUSE THERE ARE PENDING APPEALS
In Sberbank of Russia v The OJSC International Bank of Azerbaijan [2018] EWHC 2777 (Comm)Mr Justice Bryan had to consider whether to adjourn a case management conference pending appeals in other cases. The judge considered the overriding objective and held that…
COSTS IN AN ESTATE CLAIM: REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION WAS A FACTOR TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION
I am grateful to barrister James Miller for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Truman in Nicholls -v- Nicholls (19th June 2018), available here NICH19062018APP. The judgment is solely concerned with costs in relation to an action…
NEW WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED TO CASE MANAGEMENT: COMPLIANCE WITH DIRECTIONS IS THE ONLY SAFE OPTION
In SJ Moore (Jeweller) Limited -v- Squibb Group Limited [2018] EWHC 2731 (QB) Denton principles were considered and applied when the defendant wanted to adduce new evidence. What is notable here is the fact that the defendant had the expert…
INDEMNITY COSTS: CAN BE AWARDED WHEN CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES FOUR DAYS INTO A SIX WEEK TRIAL
In Hosking & Anor v Apax Partners LLP & Ors [2018] EWHC 2732 (Ch) Mr Justice Hildyard awarded indemnity costs in a case where the claimant discontinued four days into a six week trial. “My assessment is that this was high-risk…
COURT STEPS OUTSIDE THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT AMOUNTED TO AN ABUSE
The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) guards its fixed costs regime very jealously. Prior to the decision in Link Up Mitaka Ltd (t/a Thebigword) v Language Empire Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 2728 there appears to have only been one previous…
MARMITE: SKELETON ARGUMENTS: “SO CALLED”: ATTEMPTS TO APPEAL THE FACTS: A SPREAD OF ISSUES CONSIDERED
In Solicitors Regulation Authority v Day & Ors [2018] EWHC 2726 the Divisional Court rejected the SRA’s appeal against a decision of the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal. There are some interesting comments about the number of documents and the length of skeleton’s…
YOU’RE FIRED: A LITIGATOR ON THE APPRENTICE 4: DOUGHNUTS AND THE LAW: OUR LAWYERS HIDING IN THE HOLE IN THE MIDDLE
This week the teams were making and selling doughnuts. Our lawyers were on the losing team but both survive in the series for a further week. This is not surprising, there is a long history of lawyers, law and doughnuts….
LIMITATION PERIODS AT SEA: A CAUTIONARY TALE FROM THE SUPREME COURT: A WAKE UP CALL FOR PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATORS -YOU MUST KNOW ABOUT DIFFERING LIMITATION PERIODS
This blog has, on many occasions, warned about the dangers posed by “different” limitation periods. This danger can be seen in the decision of the Supreme Court today in Warner v Scapa Flow Charters (Scotland) [2018] UKSC 52. I must emphasise…
A CLAIM FORM CASE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: GOOD NEWS FOR CLAIMANTS: STAY A WHILE AND FIND OUT
In the judgment today in Grant v Dawn Meats (UK) [2018] EWCA Civ 2212 the Court of Appeal held that an order staying an action also imposed a stay on the obligation to serve the claim form. The claim form was…
AGGRESSIVE LITIGATION IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS (WITH A COMMENT, OR TWO, AMONG THE WAY)
I am grateful to barrister Adam Heppinstall for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser today in Bates -v- The Post Office [2018] EWHC 2968 (QB). This is a forceful judgment and what the judge had…
SANCTIONS AND COSTS BUDGETS: A “PARTIAL” BUDGET DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES BUT A “PARTIAL” SUCCESS FOR THE CLAIMANT ON APPEAL
In the judgment today in Page v RGC Restaurants Ltd [2018] EWHC 2688 (QB) Mr Justice Walker allowed an appeal in relation to the sanctions imposed when a claimant failed to file an costs budget that complied with the rules. The…
A HARSH REMINDER: IF YOU DON’T TURN UP FOR TRIAL THEN THE TEST FOR SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE IS VERY TOUGH: BE PROMPT, BE VERY PROMPT
In Lomax & Ors v Greenslade [2018] EWHC 2623 (Ch) Mr Justice Henry Carr refused to set aside a judgment obtained after the defendant failed to attend trial. There was a major mistake on the part of the court, however the…
VERY LATE CHANGE FROM PART 8 TO PART 7: NUANCED CASE MANAGEMENT IN THE TCC
There is an interesting piece of case management in the judgment of Recorder Andrew Singer QC (sitting as a Judge of the Technology and Construction Court) in Ealing Care Alliance Ltd v London Borough of Ealing [2018] EWHC 2630 (TCC). …
“RECKLESS EXPERTS”: SHOULDERING THE BLAME: WHEN THE EXPERT HAS NOT READ THE DOCUMENTS TO HAND
The judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 2581 (QB) was looked at earlier. It made the point that “reckless” reporting by experts can lead to experts being in contempt of court. This led me to…
SUCCESSFUL PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION BY DEFENDANTS: CLAIMANTS HAD TO GIVE INFORMATION AS TO IMPECUNIOSITY
In EUI Ltd v Charles & Ors [2018] EW Misc B7 (CC) HHJ Robert Harrison made an order that claimants give pre-action disclosure of documents relevant to the issue of impecuniosity. The practical consequences of this decision could be enormous. Given…
SOLICITORS AND EXPERT WITNESSES CAN GO TO JAIL: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE VASTLY CHANGED MEDICAL REPORT
In Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 2581 (QB) Mr Justice Garnham found a solicitor and a doctor in contempt of court. The solicitor was imprisoned for 12 months, the doctor given a six month sentence,…
EXPERT EVIDENCE – SHOULD YOU FRET ABOUT WHAT THE EXPERT HAS QUOTED? I DON’T LIKE MONDAYS BUT YOU CAN KEEP THE GUITAR PARTS
In Moylett v Geldof & Anor [2018] EWHC 893 (Ch) Mr Justice Carr considered some aspects relating to the admissibility of expert evidence. Statements of others included in a report are not expert evidence, however the inclusion of those statements did…
USING A SKELETON ARGUMENT TO TRY TO FILL GAPS IN THE EVIDENCE THIS IS NOT GOING TO END WELL…
The judgment today in M&P Enterprises (London) Ltd v Norfolk Square (Northern Section) Ltd [2018] EWHC 2665 (Ch) makes interesting reading. The appeal concerned criticisms of the conduct of a trial by a circuit judge. The main difficulty was that the…
CONSTRUCTION OF A PART 36 OFFER: DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENT IS A PLOT TOO FAR
In Bentley Design Consultants Ltd v Sansom [2018] EWHC 2238 (TCC) Mrs Justice Jefford DBE considered a novel point on the construction of a Part 36 offer. She held that a Part 36 offer made by a claimant could not be…
YOU’RE FIRED: A LITIGATION LAWYER ON THE APPRENTICE 3: A COMIC AFFAIR
Sometimes (I suspect more often than we are willing to concede) it is not the best side that wins, it is the least worst side that doesn’t lose. That is the lesson to take away from this week’s apprentice. Our…
WHEN WITNESSES DID NOT ATTEND TRIAL 3: ADVERSE INFERENCES ARE DRAWN IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE
There are three cases today about the implications of witnesses not attending trial. This was an issue in Asante v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 2570 (QB). The absence of key witnesses from the defendant led…
STRESS, LITIGATORS AND LITIGATION: A RECAP
For World Mental Health Day I am re-posting posts on this blog that deal with stress, for litigators and those involved in the litigation process. Part of my work, dealing with relief from sanctions and limitation, means I come across…
WHEN WITNESSES DO NOT ATTEND TRIAL 2: ADVERSE INFERENCES CAN ALSO BE DRAWN FROM INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE
In Yuchai Dongte Special Purpose Automobile Company Ltd v Suisse Credit Capital (2009) Ltd [2018] EWHC 2580 (Comm) Christopher Hancock QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) stated that he could and would draw adverse inferences when a decision was…
WHEN WITNESSES DO NOT ATTEND TRIAL 1: WITNESS EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: A BROKEN FINGER IS NOT A GOOD EXCUSE NOT TO ATTEND COURT
This is the first of two posts today in relation to witnesses not attending to be cross-examined. In EC Medica Group UK Ltd & Ors v Dearnley-Davison & Ors [2018] EWHC 1952 (Ch) Kelyn Bacon QC (sitting as a Deputy High…
PROVING THINGS 129: IMPATIENT PATIENT DID NOT BREAK THE CHAIN OF CAUSATION: SUPREME COURT DECISION TODAY
The Supreme Court decision today in Darnley -v- Croydon Health Service NHS Trust [2018]UKSC 50 marks a development in the law of negligence, and also in relation to proving causation. “Far from constituting a break in the chain of causation,…
APPEALING A SECTION 33 DECISION – IS HARD TO DO: KIMATHI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
In refusing permission to appeal in Kimathi & Ors v Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2018] EWCA Civ 2213 the Court of Appeal emphasised the difficulty involved in appealing a discretionary decision made under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980. “The…
You must be logged in to post a comment.