THE DANGERS OF SERVING A NOTICE OF NON-ADMISSION: LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING AWARDED
Another aspect of the judgment in Duke of Sussex & Ors v MGN Ltd (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 274 (Ch) was the defendant’s conduct in serving a notice of non-admission. Service of the notice led to considerable extra costs being incurred. …
PART 36, WITNESS STATEMENTS, INDEMNITY COSTS AND CONDUCT: READ ALL ABOUT IT
In Duke of Sussex & Ors v MGN Ltd (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 274 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt made some complex costs orders in relation to the litigation. However the fundamental point was that parties that the claimants that failed…
COST BITES 133: £196,000 AWARDED ON A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT (IN A FAMILY CASE)
The judgment of Mrs Justice Arbuthnot in KS v VS [2024] EWHC 278 (Fam) shows why it is important that family lawyers are fully aware of the principles relating to inter-partes costs orders and also the procedures governing summary assessments. …
PROVING THINGS 237: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE, FAILS TO PROVE IT HAD SUFFERED DAMAGES HAD IT SUCCEEDED (SOMETHING ABOUT EXPERT EVIDENCE TOO)
In Hamsard One Thousand And Forty-Three Ltd v AE Insurance Brokers Ltd [2024] EWHC 262 (Comm) the claimant failed to establish its case. The judgment shows many issues with the claimant’s evidence, in particular the problems that flowed from issues…
ACCOMMODATION AND APPLIANCE CLAIMS – WEBINAR 15th FEBRUARY 2024
A webinar on the 15th February looks at accommodation and appliance claims in personal injury cases. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR Claims for accommodation and appliances are a major part of many serious claims. Here…
CLAIMANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE THE JUDGE FOUND FOR THE DEFENDANT ON A BASIS THAT WAS NOT PLEADED
I am grateful to barrister Tom Morris for giving me details of the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Jacobs v Chalcot Crescent (Management) Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 259 (Ch). It is an important case about statements of case. The…
CHANGES TO THE FIXED COSTS RULES 2: 20 PAGES IN AN EXPERT’S REPORT DOES NOT MEAN 20 PAGES
Another change being introduced on the 6th April 2024 is a change (or possibly clarification) in relation to to the number of pages in an expert report in the Intermediate Track. The substantive report is still limited to 20 pages….
“TELL ME MORE, TELL ME MORE”: COURT OF APPEAL SENDS OUT CLEAR MESSAGE OF THE DANGERS OF SEEKING “CLARIFICATION” OF A JUDGMENT: IT MIGHT NOT GET YOU VERY FAR…
In YM (Care Proceedings) (Clarification of Reasons) [2024] EWCA Civ 71 the Court of Appeal issued a clear warning about the misuse of the practice of “seeking clarification” from the judge following a judgment. The decision is aimed specifically at…
PENAL NOTICES ON ORDERS – CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 6th APRIL 2024: A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE BY THE USE OF THE WORD “BY”
Yesterday we looked at a case where the judge held it was inappropriate for the court to add a penal notice to an existing order. The rules relating to penal notices are changing on the 6th April as a result…
THIS WAS NOT AN APPROPRIATE CASE TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO AN ORDER: COURT WILL DETERMINE THE SUBSTANTIVE DISPUTE INSTEAD
In Wintermute Trading Ltd v Terraform Labs Pte Ltd [2024] EWHC 141 (KB) Mr Justice Lavender considered whether it was appropriate, on the facts of this case, to add a penal notice to an order for disclosure. He held that…
CHANGES TO THE FIXED COSTS RULE 1: WHEN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS MUST BE ALLOCATED TO THE MULTI TRACK
There are a number of significant changes taking place to the fixed costs rules, coming into force on the 6th April 2024. These are introduced by The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2024. Here we look at the change to the…
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE JUDGMENT WAS NOT RECORDED? APPEAL PROCEEDS BY WAY OF A REHEARING
There are interesting issues considered in the judgment of Mr Recorder Adrian Jack in AS v AB [2024] EWFC 24. A party was appealing. The recording (and backup recording) failed to record the judge’s judgment and there was no agreed…
COST BITES 132: INTERIM PAYMENTS FOR COSTS AND COSTS OF A CONSEQUENTIAL HEARING
In Lifestyle Equities CV & Anor v Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Limited & Ors [2023] EWHC 2923 (Ch) Mr Justice Mellor considered issues relating to an interim payment on costs and whether a consequentials hearing should be assessed…
DENTON WATCH 3: DENTON IN THE FAMILY COURTS
In TRC v NS [2024] EWHC 80 (Fam) Mrs Justice Lieven considered the issues relating to relief from sanction in the context of an appeal in the Family Court. She held that Denton principles applied. “… the stricter…
DAMAGES FOR CARE: RECENT CASES AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE FOR PRACTITIONERS: WEBINAR 8th FEBRUARY 2024
This webinar look at claims for care, the law underpinning care and assistance claims, looking at practical ways of preparing the case and presenting the schedule and cover. The webinar covers, in particular, the cases and observations made in recent…
“RULE 1 FOR ANY JUDGE DEALING WITH A CASE” :SETTING ASIDE AN ORDER AFTER ONLY ONE PARTY HAS BEEN HEARD: SUPREME COURT OBSERVATIONS AND CASES IN THE CIVIL COURTS
There are some interesting issues raised in the Supreme Court judgment in Potanina v Potanin [2024] UKSC 3. The opening lines of the judgment, however, reiterate an important principle in relation to the need for a rehearing after a party…
DENTON WATCH 2: COURT REFUSES LATE APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL
In Tameside Caravans and Storage Ltd v Viavecto Ltd [2024] EWHC 95 (KB) Mr Justice Constable refused the defendant’s request for permission to appeal out of time. The fact that the defendant was a litigant in person at the time…
DENTON WATCH: CLAIMANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN THE CLAIM FORM WAS NOT SERVED DUE TO SOLICITOR’S MISTAKEN BELIEF THAT IT WOULD BE SERVED BY THE COURT
In Phipps v Goulbourne (Re the Estate of Tetla Yvonne Goulboure otherwise Tetla Yvonne Butler) [2024] EWHC 130 (Ch) Master Teverson refused the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions. The claimant failed to serve a claim form, in accordance with…
Opportunities and Threats in Commercial Costs Litigation: Afternoon conference 29th February 2024 in Manchester
My colleagues in the costs team at Kings Chambers alongside three eminent guest speakers are presenting a half day conference on the 29th February 2024 in Manchester. Booking details are available here. THE CONERENCE At this timely conference, four…
ATTEMPTING TO GIVE NEW EVIDENCE WHEN THE ADVOCATE IS MAKING SUBMISSIONS: ANOTHER ISSUE IN THE POST OFFICE CASE
The recent post about the decision in Karimi, R (On the Application Of) v Sheffield City Council [2024] EWHC 93 (Admin), caused me to review another earlier blog post about the Post Office case. It concerned an attempt to introduce new…
A DEFENDANT CANNOT SIMPLY SEEK TO SET ASIDE THE CONSEQUENCES OF A DEBARRING ORDER: AN APPLICATION SOUNDLY REFUSED
In Al Saud v Gibbs [2024] EWHC 123 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver refused a defendant’s application to set aside a debarring order so that they could be involved in the trial of the action. The judgment contains important observations on…
A “BEGUILING APPARENT COST SAVING SHORT CUT” TURNED OUT TO BE A MISTAKE: PLEADINGS MAY WELL BE NECESSARY WHEN AN ACTION IS TRANSFERRED FROM PART 8 TO PART 7
There is a short passage in the judgment of HH Judge Davis-White KC in Chapman & Anor v Celtic Property Developments Ltd (Re Celtic Property Developments Ltd and Companies Act 2006) [2024] EW Misc 6 (CC) which reflects an issue…
SEEKING PERMISSION TO RELY ON AN EXPERT DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: IMPORTANT JUDGMENT BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
In Yesss (A) Electrical Ltd -v- Warren [2024] EWCA Civ 14 the Court of Appeal considered the law relating to when an application for relief from sanctions comes into play. The judgment gives clear guidance about the question of when…
SERVING A SKELETON LATE DOES NOT A HAPPY JUDGE MAKE: IT IS A VICE TO SUPPLY MATERIALS LATE IN THE DAY
In Karimi, R (On the Application Of) v Sheffield City Council [2024] EWHC 93 (Admin) Fordham J sent out a reminder to practitioners (and particularly those who draft skeleton arguments) of the need to file skeleton arguments in accordance with…
EVERY LITTLE HELPS: EACH DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY £18,000 EXEMPLARY DAMAGES IN STAGED CRASH CASE
The judgment of HHJ Baucher in Alghafagi v Tesco Stores Ltd [2023] EW Misc 19 (CC) is one of a series of judgments in related cases. It relates to what the judge has found to be a complex conspiracy to…
THE WITNESS EVIDENCE AT TRIAL WAS DIFFERENT TO THE PLEADED CASE AND THE WITNESS STATEMENTS: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WHY CARE IS NEEDED
Earlier this month I posted an article on the need for “self protection” by lawyers when drafting witness statements. An example of why care is needed can be seen in the judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies, sitting as a High…
DAMAGES FOR THE SELF EMPLOYED AND THOSE INVOLVED IN ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORT: WEBINAR 25th JANUARY 2024
On the 24th January there is a webinar looking at claims for damages for self-employed people. It also looks at the issues relating to losses, particularly loss of earnings, caused by those involved in sports and entertainment (it also looks…
PROVING THINGS 236: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENT THAT IT HAD LOST MORE THAN £6 MILLION FAILED TO TRAVEL: CAUSATION NOT ESTABLISHED
The judgment of Simon Tinkler, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, in Ickenham Travel Group Ltd v Tiffin Green Ltd [2024] EWHC 27 (Comm) is another classic example of a failure to prove damages. The defendant had been in…
QOCS: CLAIMS FOR £1 IN DAMAGES AND NOMINAL DAMAGES STILL HAVE QOCS PROTECTION
In Clark & Ors v Adams & Anor [2024] EWHC 62 (KB) Mr Justice Soole determined that claims for £1 in damages and for “vindicatory purposes only” still have the protection of QOCS. The size of the claim and the…
EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: ESSENTIAL POINTS FOR PRACTITIONERS AND EXPERTS: WEBINAR 24th JANUARY 2024
Keen readers will note that already this week there have been two cases reported on this blog where the conduct or “expertise” of experts have been subject to judicial criticism. Issues relating to expert evidence in litigation have been a…
COST BITES 131: TIME LIMIT FOR ASSESSMENT EXTENDED WHEN BENEFICIARY CHALLENGES COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
I am grateful to barrister Alicia Tew for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal decision today in Kenig v Thomson Snell & Passmore Llp [2023] EWHC 181 (SCCO). The Court considered the question of whether the costs judge…
EXPERTS NOT QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON THE MATTERS THEY DID: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT DECISION
Another example of expert evidence going awry can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Balachandra v The General Dental Council [2024] EWHC 18 . The experts in question were giving evidence in relation to matters that…
“AN EXPERT WITNESS IS NOT HELPING THE COURT BY TRYING TO MAKE THE EVIDENCE FIT THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS”: JUDGE FINDS EXPERT “UNPROFESSIONAL AND UNACCEPTABLE”
In LCC v V & B [2023] EWFC 268 HHJ Booth commented on one of the expert witnesses. He found that the evidence given involved conjecture. The criticism of the expert is robust. “An expert witness is not helping…
“MY LAWYER DRAFTED MY STATEMENT”: A REMINDER OF THE NEED FOR SELF-PROTECTION
We have seen a high profile example recently of a witness stating that their statement had been drafted by the lawyers involved. This is not a rare occurrence. Here is a recap of some of the issues that litigators need…
THIRD CLAIM FORM CASE OF THE YEAR: FAILURE TO SERVE A SEALED CLAIM FORM, SERVING BY EMAIL WITHOUT THE DEFENDANTS’ CONSENT: IT ENDS UP BADLY FOR THE CLAIMANT
I am grateful to barrister Alicia Tew for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Karen Walden-Smith in Harper -v- Bamber & Lewis (Cambridge County Court – copy of which is available here judgment in Bamber v Harper ). …
SECOND CLAIM FORM CASE OF THE YEAR: SERVICE ABROAD, ANTARCTICA AND CPR PART 11
The judgment of Master Thornett in Lunn v Antarctic Logistics Centre International (Pty) Ltd [2023] EWHC 2856 (KB) relates to a defendant disputing jurisdiction. It was held that it was open to the defendant to dispute jurisdiction. That application has…
MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE 5: ATTEMPTS TO PUT THE COURT “IN TERROREM” WERE NOT WELCOME
In March 2019 I wrote about the judgment in Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd (No 3) [2019] EWHC 606 (QB), the post noted that “parts of the judgment set out arguments and conduct of litigation that is, to say the…
DAMAGES FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY AFTER SEEING A DEATH : SOME IMPORTANT POINTS CLARIFIED BY THE SUPREME COURT
The judgment of the Supreme Court in Paul & Anor v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2024] UKSC 1 will be the subject of detailed scrutiny by practitioners and academics for years to come. It is an action where the claimants…
MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE 4: THE POST OFFICE’S ATTEMPT TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE AND ITS CLAIM TO HAVE “SUPERNATURAL POWERS”
On March 16 2019 this blog had three separate posts on the Post Office case. The post repeated here gives an example of the Post Office’s extremely “robust” strategy. It attempted to strike out a large part of the claimants’…
DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: WEBINAR 18th JANUARY 2024
An injured claimant is often most concerned about their ability to earn their living. This webinar looks at the essential elements of a claim for loss of earnings. It looks at recent cases to illustrate in a practical way how…
MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE 3: THE POST OFFICE’S APPLICATION THAT THE JUDGE RECUSE THEMSELVES BECAUSE HE WAS “BIASED” AGAINST THEM
The Post Office was so convinced of the righteousness of its case that it determined that any findings against it must be due to judicial bias. Having lost some applications before the trial judge it attempted to have the judge…
WITNESS EVIDENCE AND WITNESS DEMEANOUR: A GEM OF A CASE: A WITNESS SUMMONS CAN LEAD TO UNWELCOME SURPRISES
Issues of witness demeanour and credibility figured highly in the judgment of District Judge Dinan-Hayward in TM v AM [2023] EWFC 247. It is an interesting story which shows the risks of compelling a witness to attend court and of…
MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE 2: THE JUDGE’S VIEW ON WITNESS CREDIBILITY
I am repeating a post first written in 2019. Matters that are in the public consciousness now were very much in the consciousness of the legal profession then. This post dealt with the trial judge’s view of the credibility of…
FIRST CLAIM FORM CASE OF 2024: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF WHEN THE DEFENDANT WAS SERVED BY THE WRONG METHOD: NO RELIEF AVAILABLE
It took until the 4th January for the first case in relation to service of the claim form to come to light. In Chehaib v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust & Ors [2024] EWHC 2 (KB) Master Stevens dismissed…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: TEN KEY POINTS WORTH REPEATING
In January 2017 I wrote about a case where a newly qualified solicitor had been struck off . The solicitor “had ‘messed up’ on a handful of the 170 cases he was handling and did not seek help from colleagues”. …
FLOODING AND THE LAW: USEFUL LINKS AND GENERAL GUIDANCE
Simply judging by the state of the rivers, and some of the roads, around me issues relating to flooding are back. This is a useful time to repeat the guide to flooding issues that I have printed several times before….
DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THE CLAIMANT’S STATEMENT IS SIMPLY A REHASH OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
I am grateful to barrister Nadia Whittaker for sending me a copy of the judgment of Recorder Sheehan KC in the case of Ball -v- The Wolverhampton NHS Trust. It is a working example of the difficulties that flow when…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: TWELVE THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW TO AVOID “DICING WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH”
This is a periodic post (every 3 – 4 years or so) about issues relating to service of the claim form. It will be surprising if there are not cases (and subsequent blog posts) about service issues this year. There…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: WEBINAR 11th JANUARY: PART OF THE DAMAGES SERIES 2024
On the 11th January 2024 I am presenting a webinar on Damages for pain and suffering. This is a part of a series of webinars looking at the basic elements of major heads of damages for personal injury, with a…
COST BITES 130: WHAT COSTS ARE RECOVERABLE WHEN A CLIENT SACKS A SOLICITOR WORKING UNDER A CFA? STICK OR TWIST
The judgment of Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker in Sellers v Simpkins [2023] EWHC 3296 (SCCO) considers the issue of what costs a client is due to pay when they have terminated the retainer with a solicitor acting under a CFA….
You must be logged in to post a comment.