ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS DEPLOYED IN COURT: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION
The judgment of Master McCloud in Dring v Cape Distribution Ltd & Anor (Constitution – access to courts – open justice) [2017] EWHC 3154 (QB) considers the issue of whether the public should have access to documents disclosed during the course…
HOT TUBBING OF EXPERTS: NEW PRACTICE DIRECTION
The 93rd Update on Practice Direction Amendments also introduced a change in the rules as to concurrent evidence from experts. This gives the trial judge a considerable degree of flexibility about the way in which expert evidence is heard. These rules came…
MAKE UP A FRAUDULENT CASE, TELL LIES TO THE COURT – GO TO JAIL: THE FORGED WILL CASE HAS A SEQUEL
An earlier post looked at Patel -v- Patel [2017] EWHC 133 (Ch) in which the judge disbelieved all the witnesses who gave evidence that a will had been made in 2005. The trial judge observed. “My remaining concern with Nirja’s evidence is…
CLAIMANT ACCEPTING PART 36 OFFER LATE: COURT ORDERED INDEMNITY COSTS FOR THE PERIOD BETWEEN EXPIRY AND ACCEPTANCE
In Lokhova v Longmuir [2017] EWHC 3152 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered the court’s discretion when a claimant accepted a defendant’s Part 36 offer late. KEY POINTS A court had jurisdiction to vary the normal order for costs when a claimant…
PROVING THINGS 80: PROVING A SUBROGATED CLAIM: HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS NOT RECOVERED IN FULL
It is not uncommon for an insurer to seek to add a claim for outlay to a claim. This is particularly the case in relation to health insurers who seek to recover outlay in a claim for damages for personal…
WITNESSES WHO ARGUE THE CASE AND EXPERTS WHO ACT AS ADVOCATES: THIS IS NOT GOING TO HELP …
In British Telecommunications Plc v Office Of Communications [2017] CAT 25 the Competition Appeal Tribunal commented on two of the central evidential issues of much commercial litigation: witnesses who give much commentary and “argue” the case; experts who act as advocates. …
SECOND ACTION NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: COURT RESOURCES DOES NOT “TRUMP THE OVERRIDING NEED TO DO JUSTICE”
In Davies v Carillion Energy Services Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 3206 (QB) Mr Justice Morris upheld a finding that a second claim brought by the claimant was not an abuse of process. “…even post-Jackson, ultimately, the importance of the efficient…
NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE “BEYOND” THE 11th HOUR NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED IN THE TCC
In DPM Property Services Ltd v Emerson Crane Hire Ltd [2017] EWHC 3092 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson overturned a decision giving a counterclaiming defendant permission to rely upon an expert report on quantum shortly before trial. The case is an example…
PROVING THINGS 79: SOME THINGS JUST CAN’T BE A COINCIDENCE: A CAR CRASH OF A CASE
We have already looked today at the judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Yavuz & Ors[2017] EWHC 3088 (QB). However that judgment also contains a close and careful analysis of witness evidence. “I start by asking myself this question:…
SIGNING THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH IN PRE-ACTION DOCUMENTS: WILL THE SOLICITOR GO TO JAIL OR NOT?
There has already been some discussion in the Gazette about the judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Yavuz & Ors [2017] EWHC 3088 (QB). In particular the observations in relation to signature of documents by the legal representative. This…
ASSIGNMENT OF CFAs: IT CAN BE DONE
In Budana v The Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 1980 the Court of Appeal decided that a CFA can be assigned from one solicitor to another. THE CASE The claimant was injured. She entered into a…
PROVING THINGS 78: AN ABSENT WITNESS IS NEVER GOING TO HELP: DEFENDANT’S FAILURE TO TAKE CONTEMPORARY STATEMENTS LEADS TO ADVERSE INFERENCES
In a talk today to a group of clinical negligence lawyers I discussed the issue of evidence, and “missing” documents and witnesses. In particular the relevance of Keefe v Isle of Man Steam Packet Co Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 683 on the…
CHANGES TO THE RULES IN RELATION TO THE COSTS OF COSTS MANAGEMENT: COMPARE AND CONTRAST
There has been a change to the rules governing the costs of costs management. This was introduced by the 93rd Update on Practice Direction Amendments. The Ministry of Justice have confirmed that these have come into force. * THE NEW RULE:…
WHEN AN APPEAL MISSES THE POINT: APPELLANT FAILED TO IDENTIFY THE ISSUES ON APPEAL
There are some surprising observations in the judgment in The Bar Standards Board (BSB) v Crawford [2017] EWHC 3101 (Admin). Not the least that the appellant’s documents did not deal with central issues in the appeal. “The grounds of appeal in…
PROVING THINGS 77: AN UNATTRACTIVE ARGUMENT: WHEN A PARTY HAS CAUSED AN ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IT CANNOT BENEFIT FROM IT
When a party has caused a gap in the evidence it is rarely open to that party to rely on the absence it has caused. This was made clear by Mr Justice Foskett in JMX v Norfolk and Norwich Hospitals NHS…
THE BEST LEGAL CHRISTMAS MUSIC 2017 CONTEST: RAISING MONEY FOR THE BILLABLE HOUR
The Legal Christmas Music Contest is back this year. Bigger and better. This year the scope for entries is much wider. This year the aim is to make money for the Billable Hour Appeal. All that is required is a…
SECTION 33 DISCRETION UPHELD: ERRORS OF THE LAWYERS NOT NECESSARILY LAID AT THE DOOR OF A CLAIMANT
In Greater Manchester Police v Carroll [2017] EWCA Civ 1992 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the circuit judge allowing the claimant’s application under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980. The case is interesting because it supports the…
DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY AFTER THE EVENT PREMIUM OF £533,017.13 : EYE-WATERING DECISION FOR INSURERS
In Percy v Anderson-Young [2017] EWHC 2712 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer held that an after the event premium of £533,107.13 was recoverable. There was no sympathy for the defendant. “… in my judgment, any sympathy for the Defendant here…
LEGAL QUACKERY & AN “OVERWHELMING MIASMA OF FAKE LAW” : OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE AND OBSTRUCTING THE COURT SYSTEM
I usually confine this blog to cases relating to the law in England and Wales. However the judgment of Noonan J in Bank of Ireland Mortgage Bank -v- Martin & anor [2017] IEHC 707 was brought to my attention by an…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: RECOVERABILITY OF PREMIUMS & PROPORTIONALITY: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In Peterborough & Stamford Hospitals NHS Trust v McMenemy & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 1941 the Court of Appeal considered the position in relation to the payment of insurance premiums in clinical negligence cases. The Court decided that it is appropriate…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT NEEDED: A DECISION “POUR ENCOURAGER LES AUTRES”: A SOLICITOR CAN RELY ON A LETTER FROM THE COURT
In his judgment today in Freeborn & Anor v Marcal (t/a Dan Marcal Architects) [2017] EWHC 3046 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson had some telling observations on whether a party needed relief from sanctions and whether relief should be granted. He held…
CLAIMANT BEATS HIS OWN PART 36 OFFER: INTERESTS, COSTS AND HOW THE ADDITIONAL 10% IS CALCULATED
In Mohammed v The Home Office [2017] EWHC 3051 (QB) Mr Edward Peperall QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered the appropriate award for interest and additional damages when a claimant had beaten their own Part 36 offer. …
PROPOSED NEW RULES FOR DISCLOSURE: LINKS AND COMMENTARY
There is a consultation process going on at present in relation to disclosure. THE PROBLEM The issues of concern are summarised in the Briefing Note “(i) Since the CPR came into force 18 years ago the volume of data that…
FABRICATING DOCUMENTS AND MISLEADING THE JUDGES: WHEN KEY DOCUMENTS ARE HIDDEN BEHIND THE CURTAINS IN COURT
The judgment of Mr Justice Henry Carr in Ghassemian v Chatsworth Court Freehold Company Ltd & Ors [2016] EWHC 872 (Ch) illustrates the lengths to which some litigants will go. The judge found that the applicant had forged documents, backdated applications…
LEGAL AWARDS: HOW TO COME SECOND: A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE: 10 KEY POINTS
If you play the mandolin then, by law, you have to learn a tune known as ’O sole mio. This is a tune made famous, to a certain generation, as “Just one Cornetto”. It was even a hit for Elvis Presley,…
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW, SERIES 2 PART 5: REMEMBER JUDGES MAY BE TALKING ABOUT YOU: ADVICE FROM THE STREETS OF SAN FRANCISCO
Here we look at an interview with San Francisco Superior Court Judge, Curtis Karnow. The interview was about a book the judge had written “Litigation in Practice”, which is available in the UK. The original interview by is Ros Todd….
HOW MANY LITIGANTS HAVE REGRETTED STARTING THE CASE? POISE AND POLISH IS NEVER ENOUGH IN A COURT ROOM
This one paragraph from a judgement yesterday gives pause for thought. “The Claimant observed somewhat wistfully towards the conclusion of the trial that had he anticipated what was entailed, he would not have brought this claim in the first place….
AFTER THE EVENT INSURANCE DOES NOT PROHIBIT AN ORDER FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS
In Premier Motorauctions Ltd & Anor v Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 1872 the Court of Appeal decided that the existence of an after the event insurance policy to cover legal expenses did not prohibit a court from ordering…
I WANT AN ADJOURNMENT BECAUSE I’M ILL: AN APPLICATION NOT GUARANTEED BE SUCCESSFUL
The issue of adjournments because of ill-health is one of the most common search terms that leads to this blog. (I am not certain whether to be surprised at this or not). For those searching today the relevant principles are…
SIXTY YEARS OF MUNKMAN ON DAMAGES: A PICTORIAL HISTORY
It is now sixty years since the first edition of Munkman on Damages was published, it is now in its 13th edition. Looking at how it has changed over the years says a lot about how the law has developed…
WITNESS CREDIBILITY, VERY BAD SINGING AND A MOVIE: ALL HUMAN LIFE IS HERE: (SOMETHING FOR LAWYERS TOO…)
The decision in Martin & Anor v Kogan & Ors [2017] EWHC 2927 (IPEC) centred on witness credibility. Not so much honesty but accuracy of recollection. It illustrates the issue of how the judge goes about assessing evidence when witnesses…
PROVING THINGS 76: A RECAP – I DIDN’T EXPECT TO GET THIS FAR…
Today saw the 75th in the series “proving things”. I never anticipated that the series would run so long, I initially planned around 10 posts. Now we have reached 75 (and with no plans to stop) this is an appropriate…
PROVING THINGS 75: PROVING CAUSATION ON AN UNDERTAKING TO PAY DAMAGES: THE INJUNCTION THAT COST THE APPLICANT TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS: ROUND 2
We have looked before at the decision in Fiona Trust & Holding Corporation -v- Yuri Privalov & others [2016]. An applicant for a freezing order was found to have obtained the order wrongly. Consequently they were ordered to pay damages that stretched…
A DUMPER TRUCK IS COVERED BY THE MIB AGREEMENT: STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION AND DIRECTIVES
In Lewington v The Motor Insurance Bureau [2017] EWHC 2848 (Comm) Mr Justice Bryan considered whether a stolen dumper truck being driven on a public road was covered by the MIB agreement. There was a clear, and unequivocal finding that it…
SOME FEEDBACK – WHEN DEFENCE TURNS TO COUNTERCLAIM
Feedback from readers is rare. I received a letter today which the author has given be permission to reproduce. Just a quick note of thanks. I’m an LIP, having been involved in litigation as defendant for the last 3…
Proving things 74: WHEN YOUR EVIDENCE IS FAR FROM FABULOUS AND COMES WITH A “HEALTH WARNING”: APPLICANT’S CASE PUT BACK IN THE BOX
There is an interesting discussion of the evidence in the Upper Tribunal decision in Fabulous Collections Ltd v Smith (Valuation Officer), Re: 3 Poplar Arcade [2017] UKUT 452. A central part of an applicant’s case essentially disappeared on the morning of…
THE HIPPOCRATIC OATH AND LEGAL HYPOCRISY: WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM DOCTORS?
Lawyers, particularly litigators, are infinitely wise. This is because we specialise in hindsight: “Why didn’t you do that?” ; “You should have done that”; “Why wasn’t that written down?” This is particularly acute in clinical negligence cases where one profession…
LIMITATION, THE CARE ACT, COUNTY COURT JURISDICTION AND DIFFICULT TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS.
In Nottinghamshire County Council v Belton, The Estate of & Anor [2017] EW Misc 26 (CC) His Honour Judge Godsmark QC considered an issue of jurisdiction and limitation in a claim being brought by a local authority to recover fees paid…
SERVICE BY EMAIL: WHO ARE YOU SERVING? A POINT TO WATCH
The judgment in Glencore Agriculture BV v Conqueror Holdings Ltd [2017] EWHC 2893 highlights a crucial point about service by email. If you are (and are allowed to) serve by email – check that the address being used is the the…
APPEALS ON FACTS AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: DAMNED IF THE WITNESSES AGREE: DAMNED IF THEY DON’T
The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Shittu v The Home Office [2017] EWCA Civ 1748 contains some interesting observations about attempts to appeal on findings of fact, “judgecraft” and fact-finding generally. “The case followed the pattern of many…
PRO BONO COSTS ORDERS: NOT JUST FOR CHRISTMAS
I had an email this morning from Sue Nash asking me to publicise the ability of the court to make pro bono costs orders. Here is a reminder. It is important that those representing a party pro bono is aware…
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW, SERIES 2 PART 4: THREATENING YOUR OPPONENT WITH A “PROCTOLOGY EXAMINATION” AND MAKING FACES AT THE JUDGE MAY WELL BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE
This series is about learning from judges. Here I advocate (hopefully in a civil way) learning from one judgment. That is the judgment of District Judge Chin in the extraordinary case of Revson -v- Cinque & Cinque in 1999 (PC….
PROVING THINGS 73: FORESEEABILITY: NOT A TEST SET IN STONE BUT A MATTER OF COMMONSENSE
Foreseeability of damages is one of those topics that takes up a lot of space in text books but is rarely an issue in practice. The question of foreseeability of damages did, however, form a part of the judgment we…
FINDINGS OF FACT AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: A JUDGE MAKES THE FINDINGS FIRST AND CONSIDERS THE EXPERT EVIDENCE NEXT
In Graham & Anor v Campfield & Anor [2017] EWHC 2746 (Ch) Mr Justice Birss made some important observations about findings of fact and expert evidence. It shows the importance of primary findings of fact and the limitations of expert evidence. …
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW, SERIES 2 PART 3: SKELETON ARGUMENTS, PREPARATION AND PRESENTATION: AN ABSOLUTE GOLDMINE
This blog has many posts that record cases where judges have been critical of the contents (and usually length) of skeleton arguments. A remedy for most of these issues has been available since 2004. Gray’s Inn prepared a paper “Skeleton…
SERVICE BY ALTERNATIVE MEANS, THE ABSENT DEFENDANT, DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND COSTS: ABSENCE OF DEFENDANT DOESN’T CAUSE THE COURT TO MISS A GEAR
In Pirtek (UK) Ltd v Jackson [2017] EWHC 2834 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered several procedural issues. These are of wider interest, particularly issues relating to the method of service, proceeding in the defendant’s absence, summary judgment and costs. …
SORRY SILKS: IMPORTANT AS YOU ARE THE CASE IS NOT BEING HELD UP FOR YOU: THE TAIL IS NOT GOING TO WAG THE DOG
The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd [2017] EWHC 2844 (QB) contains some telling observations about case management, listing and the need to comply with the overriding objective. “Fitting hearings around [counsel’s] availability has…
SUING THE WRONG DEFENDANT? SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS?
It is always embarrassing to find out you are suing the wrong defendant and have to apply for substitution (although we have looked at cases in which the wrong claimant has issued proceedings). This issue was considered by Mr Justice…
COSTS BUDGETING AND PROPORTIONALITY TEST APPLY – EVEN IN A CASE FOR £350 MILLION
in Sharp & Ors v Blank & Ors [2017] EWHC 141 (Ch) Mr Justice Nugee considered the issue of proportionality in a case where £350 million was at stake. Mr Justice Nugee decided that the requirement for costs budgeting, and proportionality,…
COSTS AFTER DISCONTINUANCE VARIED: CLAIMANT TO PAY INDEMNITY NOT STANDARD COSTS: TWO RIGHT FEET BROUGHT THE WRONG ACTION
When a claimant discontinues an action there is an automatic provision that the claimant pay the defendant’s costs (CPR 38.6). In Two Right Feet Ltd v National Westminster Bank Plc & Ors [2017] EWHC 1745 (Ch) Ms Sara Cockerill Q.C. made…
You must be logged in to post a comment.