“WE WILL FIGHT THEM ON THE BUDGET”: COSTS BUDGETING: STOP PLAYING PROCEDURAL GAMES: COULSON J PROVIDES CLEAR GUIDANCE
Costs budgeting is not a place for the playing of procedural games. Mr Justice Coulson made this clear in his judgment published today in Findcharm Ltd -v- Churchill Group Ltd [2017] EWHC 1109 (TCC). It is a clear warning of…
WHEN THE WITNESS EVIDENCE SIMPLY SAYS – “I AGREE WITH HIM”
There was a post on this blog earlier this week about the issues caused by similar witness statements. Another intriguing problems is what happens when the witness simply says “I agree with…” the other witness. This type of “evidence” is…
BUNDLES FOR TRIALS – AND FOR THE WITNESSES
Cases where bundles are mentioned may well be like busses – they come along together. A short passage in the judgment of HHJ Matthews in Taylor -v- Taylor [2017] EWHC 1080 (Ch). Earlier in the week we looked at there…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE CASES: AN IMPRESSIVE AND THEMATIC LIST
I am grateful to barrister Matthew White for drawing my attention to an impressive table that he has prepared with his colleague Marcus Coates-Walker. They have set out, in tabular form, the post-Denton cases on relief from sanctions, analysing each…
DUTY OF FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: APPLIES TO APPLICATIONS MADE ON SHORT NOTICE
The “new year resolution” I recommended for litigators this year was to be very careful when making without notice applications. A failure to make full and frank disclosure has proven to be financially and professionally disastrous for some litigants (and…
WITNESSES, MUSIC AND RECOLLECTION: WHEN RADIO INTERVIEWS COME BACK AND THINGS ARE NOT ALRIGHT
I am looking for an excuse to blog about the decision of Judge Hacon in Editions Musicales Alpha S.A.R.L -v- Universal Music Publishing Limited [2017] EWHC 1058 (IPEC). The case shows something about witness evidence (a composer “forgot” he had agreed…
WHEN IS AN EXPERT NEEDED? NOT HERE
CPR 35. imposes a duty on the court to restrict expert evidence “Expert evidence shall be restricted to that which is reasonably required to resolve the proceedings”. This has led to some interesting case law. The most recent discussion is…
BUNDLES IN THE SUPREME COURT: EXERCISING RESTRAINT
There was a short postscript to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea [2017] UKSC 36> Lord Carnwath gave the single judgment. Even the Supreme Court complains about bundles. This adds to…
WHEN THE WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: A RECAP
There has been some discussion on Twitter this morning about the issues that arise when witnesses make statements that are, to all intents and purposes, identical. It provides an opportunity to look at some cases on this issue. They make…
MEDIATION AND LITIGATION: A REVIEW OF KEY CASES: IGNORE THEM AT YOUR PERIL
It is sometimes difficult to keep track of the cases that refer to mediation. Given that ADR can play a central role in the litigation process this is an appropriate time to review the key cases, particularly in the light…
LORD DYSON AND THE MUNKMAN LECTURE 2017: 50 YEARS OF CHANGE: SELECTED EXTRACTS
John Munkman died 17 years ago. However his legacy lives on. Firstly in his books which are still in print and secondly in the annual Munkman lecture organised by Zenith Chambers. The Munkman name may well help in attracting the…
DUTY TO DRAW ADVERSE AUTHORITIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COURT: HOW FAR DOES IT GO?
The duty to draw the court’s attention to authorities that do not support your case is an important one. In Weir -v- Hildson [2017] EWHC 983 (Ch) Mr Justice Nugee discusses the extent of this duty. THE CASE The applicant…
THE PERILS OF LEAVING ISSUE TO THE LAST MINUTE: CLAIM AGAINST SOLICITORS WAS STATUTE BARRED – AMENDMENT DISALLOWED: ADDITION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTION
The judgment of the Court of Appeal yesterday in Godfrey Morgan Solicitors (a firm) -v- Armes [2017] EWCA Civ 323 illustrates the danger of late issue of proceedings. Issue was left until the last day. An additional defendant was added…
CANCER, CAUSATION AND THE COURTS: 25th MAY 2017: CENTRAL LEEDS: PROCEEDS GO TO CANCER CHARITY
I am speaking with Oncologist Andrew Proctor, and my colleague Helen Rutherford in Leeds on the 25th May 2017 on “Cancer, Causation and the Courts”. This course: Gives a medical explanation of the nature of the most common types of…
“GOOD DAYS AND BAD DAYS”: THE ROLE OF VIDEO EVIDENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF CREDIBILITY AND DAMAGES
In Karapetianas -v- Kent and Sussex Loft Conversions Ltd [2017] EWHC 859 (QB) Mr Jonathan Swift QC considered the appropriate approach to damages when the claimant’s case as to ongoing symptoms was contradicted by video evidence. He found that the…
COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT & CONSIDERS THE IMPORTANT ROLE OF THE SINGLE JOINT EXPERT
We have already looked at the decision in Perry -v- Raleys Solicitors [2017] EWCA Civ 314 in the context of the award of interest. The decision also contains important observations about evidence and the way in which the courts approach…
COSTS AGAINST NON-PARTIES: COSTS ORDER NOT MADE AGAINST DIRECTOR
When is it appropriate to make an order against a director personally? This issue was considered in Housemaker Services Ltd -v- Cole [2017] EWHC 924 (Ch) by HHJ Paul Mattews (sitting as a High Court Judge). The judge declined to…
INTEREST ON DAMAGES AT 8% (AND THE DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT MATTERS): COURT OF APPEAL DECISION CONSIDERED
In Perry -v- Raleys Solicitors [2017] EWCA Civ 314 the Court of Appeal decided that the appropriate rate for interest on damages was 8% from the date of breach. It is not often that questions of interest on damages are…
WHEN THE ASSETS DISAPPEAR FROM A JUDGEMENT DEBTOR: POTENTIAL CAUSES OF ACTION EXPLORED
The first rule of Law School is (or should be) “don’t sue anyone who doesn’t have the cash to pay”. The most meritorious case coupled with the most astute legal team is going to get blood out of a stone….
PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: NOT GRANTED WHEN THE PURPOSE WAS TO SEEK DETAILS OF DEFENDANT’S INSURANCE COVER
In Peel Port Shareholder Finance Company Ltd-v- Dornoch Ltd [2017] EWHC 876 (TCC) Mr Justice Jefford refused an application for pre-action disclosure of an insurance policy. There is an interesting discussion of the scope of pre-action disclosure and the interrelationship…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED IN GROUP LITIGATION CASE: THE “THIRD STAGE” IN DENTON CONSIDERED IN DETAIL
In the judgment today in Kamathi -v- The Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2017] EWHC 939 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart refused an application for relief from sanctions. The Denton principles were considered in detail in the context of a late application…
OPENING LINES OF A JUDGMENT: IT STARTED WITH A TWEET: PAGING DOCTOR FREUD
The opening line of a judgment is often a good guide as to what it to follow. For a few days there has been some, occasionally heated, discussion, as to the best opening lines of a judicial pronouncement. THE TWITTER…
BOUNDARIES, BORDERS AND COSTS: IF YOU LEAVE THE ISSUE OF COSTS TO THE JUDGE YOU MAY NOT GET THE ANSWER YOU WANT
The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Powles -v- Reeves [2016] EWCA Civ 1375 shows the dangers of not being able to agree the principle of who should pay the costs of litigation. It shows the dangers of just…
PROVING THINGS 61: MORE ON SOCIAL MEDIA: FACEBOOK ENTRIES AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY
Facebook and social media play an increasingly important part in litigation. We have looked at several cases where social media has played a critical part in the assessment of witness credibility. Facebook played a part of the judgment today of…
PRESSING THE WRONG BUTTON: THE PERILS OF EMAIL “REPLY ALL” IN LITIGATION (OR ARBITRATION)
Many, if not all, of us will have made some errors with emails on some occasion. There is a danger, however, when this happens in litigation. This can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Popplewell in T -v-…
NOTES FROM A BELEAGUERED BENCH: THE IRON FIST AND NO VELVET GLOVER
There is a section on this blog which has links to posts and articles on procedure. Usually I am content to post the link and lead to it readers to look at it themselves. The article by Peter Glover in…
APPLICATIONS TO AMEND APPEAL NOTICE AND PARTICULARS AT A LATE STAGE NOT ALLOWED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
I am grateful to Jill Greenfield from Field Fisher for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal transcript in Howe -v- Motor Insurers Bureau (CA 8th February 2017). This is a judgment refusing permission to amend and for…
MACHISMO OR MADNESS? THE DANGERS OF MAKING A “TIME LIMITED” OFFER OR WITHDRAWING A PART 36 OFFER
There may be tactical advantages to making a “time limited” offer, or withdrawing a Part 36 offer after 21 days. However this can backfire badly. We have already looked at the decision in Thakkar -v- Singh [2017] EWCA 117 in…
MERRIX NOT BEING APPEALED (BUT HARRISON IS – WATCH THIS SPACE)
The decision in Merrix -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 346 (QB) is not being appealed by the defendant. The rationale is, apparently, that the defendant did not want to risk losing the listing of the appeal in Harrison…
INTEREST ON AWARD NOT AUTOMATIC: A DECISION WHERE NO INTEREST WAS AWARDED
The question of when, and whether, interest should be awarded is one of these issues in litigation that receives little coverage. In Pinfold -v- Ansell [2017] EWHC 889 (Ch) HHJ David Cooke decided not to award interest at all. It…
MEDIATION AND LITIGATION: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE DANGERS OF IGNORING OFFERS TO MEDIATE
This blog reports regularly on cases where the courts have highlighted the advantages of mediation and the dangers of rejecting an offer to mediate. The latest note of cautious comes from the judgment of Lord Justice Jackson in Thakkar -v-…
BILL OF £101,677.21 AND THE CLAIMANT ENDS UP WITH £2,515.60: MISCONDUCT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS HAS SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES
I am grateful to Justin Edwards of BLM solicitors for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Whalan in Jago -v-Whitbread a decision of Master Whalan. A copy of that case is attached here ( 2016.10.05 – Approved Judgment)….
FILING FORM H: WHEN DOES A CASE HAVE A VALUE OF “LESS THAN £50,000”? A POINT TO WATCH
There are now several formats for Form H. The “short” one page version is now used in cases where the value is between £25,000 and “less than £50,000”. Some judges are interpreting this strictly to read between £25,000 and £49,999″….
CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: STILL A MAJOR PROBLEM: PROCEDURAL ERRORS ARE “INEVITABLE”
We have had graphic examples recently of cases where committal proceedings in civil, or family, proceedings have gone badly wrong. In LL -v- Lord Chancellor [2017] EWCA Civ 237, the Court of Appeal held that the procedure adopted…
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WRITE: THE SUPREME COURT MAY READ IT ONE DAY (AND IT MAY END UP ON A BLOG SOMEWHERE…)
There has already been some interesting debate on Twitter about one aspect of the Supreme Court decision in Times -v- Flood [2017] UKSC 33 that has not made the headlines. Dominic Regan observed that the case is another example…
DELAY, DENTON, APPEALS AND CROSS-APPEALS: EXTENSION OF TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED
In Pinisetty -v-Manikonda [2017] EWHC 838 (QB) Mr Justice Langstaff considered an issue relating to an appeal (and cross-appeal) being out of time. Although the judgment on this issue is largely academic (the appeal failed in any event), it contains…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: CHANGING WITNESS STATEMENTS, DESTROYED DOCUMENTS AND THE DEFENDANT’S WITNESS WITH NO CREDIBILITY AT ALL
The judgment of Mr Justice Goss in RE -v- Calderdale & Huddersfield Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 824 (QB) shows some concern about the nature of the evidence adduced by the defendant. Documents had been (inadvertently) destroyed and definitely altered. Witnesses…
ISSUING PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION ARE TAKEN OUT: A FATAL ERROR FROM THE OUTSET
In Qunintana -v- Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust 28/03/2017 Master Cook upheld the established principle that an action cannot be brought by administrators of an estate before the letters of administration are taken out. Proceedings cannot later be amended…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED TO DEFENDANT WHO APPEARED BY COUNSEL: A “SURPRISING STATE OF AFFAIRS” PUT RIGHT
There may well be a term for the process by which a number of decisions, which appeared sensible at the time they were made, lead to a ridiculous result. This principle may well apply to what happened in Falmouth House…
PROVING THINGS 60: PUTTING SEAWEED OUT OF THE WINDOW: THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE AND THE JUDGE WHO WAS EVEN-HANDEDLY OFFENSIVE:
The Court of Appeal judgment in McBride -v- UK Insurance Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 144 has been covered widely on the issue of the appropriate rate for car hire charges after an accident. However less widely discussed is the fact that,…
KNOW (AND FOLLOW) THE RULES – OR ELSE: DPP COPS IT.
There is some irony in the decision of Mr Justice Fraser in R (RA) -v- The Director of Public Prosecutions [2017] EWHC 714 (Admin). The claimant, a litigant in person, complied with the rules. The defendant, a specialised government department…
BANKS, WITNESSES AND CREDIBILITY: AN INTERESTING JUDGMENT
There are many reasons why lawyers should read the decision in Thomas -v- Triodos Bank NV [2017] EWHC 314 (QB). There is an interesting consideration of the duty of care a bank owes a customer and the Hedley Byrne principles….
JUDICIAL INTERVENTION, INTERRUPTIONS AND HOT TUBBING: JUDICIAL LATITUDE IS NOT UNLIMITED
In Shaw -v- Grouby [2017] EWCA Civ 233 the Court of Appeal made some observations about the dangers of a judge getting too inquisitorial in the course of a trial, particularly in the course of cross-examination. “The judge intervened in…
FILE A SKELETON ARGUMENT – IT IS MANDATORY
Many of the posts about skeleton arguments on this blog have been about content (usually length), The surprising aspect of R -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 639 (Admin) is that both sides decided not to file…
THE TRIAL JUDGE AND FINDINGS OF FACT: COURT OF APPEAL DID NOT OVERTURN FINDINGS OF TRIAL JUDGE
A disappointed insurer failed in its attempt to overturn findings of a trial judge in Hamid -v- Khalid [2017] EWCA Civ 201. “The task of a trial judge is difficult enough without having to deal expressly with every single piece…
WHEN THE EVIDENCE OF THE “INDEPENDENT” WITNESS IS NOT ACCEPTED: WHEN WE WILL EVER LEARN?
In a case where there are disputed facts a party that has an independent witness usually holds a strong hand. However in Elson -v- Stilgoe [2017] EWCA Civ 193 today the Court of Appeal upheld a decision where the trial…
PLEADINGS, FACTS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: EXPERT SHOULD NOT “USURP THE FUNCTION OF THE COURT”
There is an interesting discussion of the purpose of pleadings and expert evidence in the judgment of HH Parkes QC in PP -v- The Home Office [2017] EWHC 663 (QB). The fact that an expert report is referred to in…
LIMITING CLAIM TO £10,000 DID NOT PREVENT COURT AWARDING £140,000: CPR 16.3(7) IN USE
In the judgment today in Harrath -v- Stand for Peace Ltd [2017] EWHC 653 (QB) Sir David Eady awarded £140,000 in a case where the claim form limited the claim to £10,000. This is an interesting development in an environment where…
WHEN PUBLIC OFFICIALS MAKE WITNESS STATEMENTS: FAREPAK REVISITED
There was a post earlier this week where a public official faced contempt of court proceedings that was “false and tended to mislead”, and was acquitted because the statement was “careless” rather than criminal. This provides a good opportunity to…
INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: READ (AND CITE) THE CORRECT CHAPTER OF COOK ON COSTS
I am grateful to John McQuater for sending me a copy of an order from HH Judge Robinson, It relates to an application on account of costs. The appeal was (for obvious reasons) compromised. However the robust terms of the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.