THE DEFENDANT’S ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER FROM THE CLAIMANT DID NOT PREVENT A SECOND ACTION IN RELATION TO A DIFFERENT (BUT RELATED) ISSUE
This is a case where the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal (in part) in relation to the striking out of a “second” action between the parties. The Court held that part of the second action was not an abuse…
COST BITES 384: THE LOSER OF AN APPLICATION USUALLY PAYS AND THERE HAS TO BE A GOOD REASON IF THEY DON’T: APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS A DECISION TO THE CONTRARY
Here we have an unusual case where, on appeal, a costs decision in favour of a defendant was overturned on the basis that that there was no good reason not to apply the normal principle that “the loser pays”. “There…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 70: THE COURT OF APPEAL HAVE STRONG WORDS TO SAY ABOUT PLEADING POINTS IN A MAJOR TRIAL
In this case the Court of Appeal, in a judgment that is eviscerating in parts, makes the point that, in some areas of practice, the List of Issues, effectively replace the pleadings. Further it has strong words to say about…
FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: A TALE OF THREE CITIES: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN THE APPEAL WAS LATE BUT THE SOLICITORS “DID NOTHING WRONG AT ALL”
In this case the judge granted permission to appeal when the appeal notice was lodged 25 days out of time. Not only is this an example of the court using its discretion under Denton and taking into accounts issues with…
THE COSTS LIABILITY OF A REPRESENTATIVE OF A DECEASED PERSON UNDER CPR 19.12 CONSIDERED: THE SITUATION IS NOT THE SAME AS AN ADMINISTRATOR OR EXECUTOR
This case considers the costs liability of a person appointed under CPR 19.12 to represent a deceased person. The court made it clear that such an appointment is not directly analogous to that of an administrator or executor. Different costs…
THE DEFENDANT WAS OUT OF TIME FOR APPLYING FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE COURT DID NOT HAVE POWER AT THIS STAGE IN ANY EVENT
This judgment provides a short reminder that if a party wants to seek permission to appeal from the court that made the decision then that application must be made at the hearing being appealed itself, or any adjournment of that…
IS AN APPLICATION VALID IF THE INCORRECT COURT FEE IS PAID? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED…
We have had a flurry of cases recently about the consequences of failing to pay the correct fee when issuing proceedings. Here we have a case where the court considers the implications of a failure to pay the correct fee…
SERVICE POINTS 37 : IS SERVICE ON A P.0. BOX GOOD SERVICE? (OH – AND BY THE WAY – AS IT TURNS OUT – THE CLAIM FORM WAS NEVER, IN FACT, SERVED AT ALL): A BIT OF A SURPRISE FOR THE CLAIMANT AT THE APPEAL STAGE
Is service on a P.O. Box address good service? That was the issue being considered in this appeal. However the claimant was in for a bit of a shock. Enquiries by the judge revealed that the claim form had never…
COST BITES 379: HIGH COURT JUDGE UPHOLDS DECISION THAT INTERIM BILLS WERE STATUTE BILLS AND THAT THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT SEEK ASSESSMENT OUT OF TIME
This decision is important for two reasons. Firstly it upholds the original judgment that the interim bills in this case were statute bills and that there were no special circumstances to allow assessment out of time. Secondly it highlights the…
AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”
Here we have a case where an important time limit was, on the face of it missed, because the court itself “thwarted” genuine attempts to lodge an appeal in time. It is an object lesson the care that needs to…
THE JUDGE FOUND AGAINST ME BECAUSE THEY GAVE TOO MUCH LEEWAY TO A LITIGANT IN PERSON : ALLEGATIONS OF THIS KIND SHOULD BE PARTICULARISED (AND CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT)
Here we consider some unusual grounds of appeal. An unsuccessful claimant appealed on the grounds, inter alia, that the judge had erred in giving leeway to the defendant who was a litigant in person. What is important here is that…
MAZUR MATTERS 58: LEARN HOW TO SUPERVISE STAFF PROPERLY – OR RISK GOING TO JAIL: IT IS WISE TO RECORD SUPERVISION ARRANGEMENTS FULLY
One key element of the Mazur decision, that needs repeating, is that it does not allow unauthorised persons to “conduct” litigation. It allows unauthorised people to assist and conduct the tasks involved in litigation so long as they are properly…
MAZUR MATTERS 57: THE INDEMNITY INSURER’S VIEW: “DOES IT CHANGE THAT MUCH REALLY?”: “I STRUGGLE TO THINK OF REAL LIFE SCENARIOS THAT WOULD HAVE FALLEN FOUL OF SHELDON J’S DISTINCTION BUT ARE NOW LAWFUL (AND VICE VERSA)”
I have written several times that when it came to providing practical guidance on how to deal with the Mazur judgment it was often insurers that were far more helpful than the regulators. It is worthwhile having a look at…
ANOTHER CASE ON FAILING TO PAY THE COURT FEE: AN APPEAL WAS STILL LODGED IN TIME EVEN THOUGH NO FEE WAS PAID AT ALL
Here we have a case that extends the principles in Siniakovich v Hassan-Soudey. The Court of Appeal held that a statutory appeal was lodged within time, even though it was sent by email to the court and no fee was…
SERVICE POINTS 32: MISSING OUT THE NAME OF THE ROAD ON THE CLAIM FORM DID NOT INVALIDATE SERVICE
The judge here considered an argument that a failure to include the name of the defendant’s street on the claim form meant that service was defective. This argument was rejected. The fact that the street was mentioned on the land…
COST BITES 369: SOMETIMES LITIGATION IS MORE ART THAN SCIENCE: “BANKSY” ENTITLED TO INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER ACTION DISCONTINUED, BUT NOT A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER
Here we have a case where the claimant discontinued. Discontinuance made the claimant liable to pay costs. However in this case it was ordered to pay costs on the indemnity basis (from a key date). The judge then considered the…
MAZUR MATTERS 56: WHY WE MUST BE WARY OF THE SRA DEFINITION: CAN AN UNAUTHORISED PERSON REALLY “CONDUCT LITIGATION” EVEN UNDER SUPERVISION?
The judgment, quite expressly, passes a lot of responsibility for the detail of supervision on to the regulators. In this respect it is important that the regulators get the law right (and lets be honest their track record to date…
MAZUR MATTERS 55: THINGS WE DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER TO (2): WHAT DEGREE OF SUPERVISION IS REQUIRED: THIS “WILL ALWAYS DEPEND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES”
It is important to note that the Court of Appeal decision yesterday did not create a “free for all” for unauthorised persons to undertake the conduct of litigation. Far from it. A central part of the judgment was the need…
MAZUR MATTERS 54: THINGS WE STILL DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER TO (1) WHAT IS MEANT BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”? THE COURT DID NOT SUPPLY AN “EXHAUSTIVE DEFINITION”
The judgment given yesterday still leaves us with many uncertainties and litigators still need to tread with some care. Here we look at one of the matters that the Court of Appeal was not able to give a definitive answer…
THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 5: THE “NUANCED” BITS: IT IS ALL ABOUT DELEGATION OF TASKS AND SUPERVISION (AND HERE IT IS OVER TO THE REGULATORS…)
I have already written that the judgement is Mazur is far more nuanced than many commentators have suggested. It does not give a “free for all” for non-authorised persons to litigate. Rather it gives authorised lawyers the ability to delegate…
THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 4: THE CONCLUSIONS: IF AN UNATHORISED PERSON IS IN REALITY CONDUCTING THE LITIGATION “THEY WILL BE COMMITTING AN OFFENCE”
The judgment in Mazur today is far more nuanced than some observers have suggested. It is not an “as we were” situation. There is still scope for those working within solicitors’ practices to be breaking the law and thus committing…
THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 3: NO DEFINITIVE DEFINITION OF THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: BUT WE DO HAVE THE “MAGNIFICENT SEVEN”
We continue our look at the judgment today by looking at the court’s more detailed consideration of what was meant by the “conduct of litigation”. The court did not give a definition. However it did give seven key points as to…
THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 2: WHAT CAN AN “UNAUTHORISED” PERSON DO?
We continue with our breakdown of the Mazur decision today. Here the Court of Appeal considers what an “unauthorised” person can do. (The next post will look at the practical examples the judgment gives). “The judge was wrong to…
MAZUR COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE OVERTURNED: THE SUPERVISION OF UNAUTHORISED PERSONS
I will be writing about this judgment throughout the day. The first posts will contain a summary of the views from the court. Later posts will analyse the position as a whole. This post contains a consideration of the carrying…
COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS REFUSAL TO GRANT ADJOURNMENT OF COMMITTAL APPLICATION: THE COURT HAD AN OBLIGATION TO ENSURE THAT A PARTY COULD AVAIL THEMSELVES OF LEGAL REPRESENTATION
In this case the Court of Appeal overturned a decision not to grant an adjournment of committal proceedings. The Court held that the judge below did not appear to be aware of the fact that a respondent to committal proceedings…
THE COURT REFUSES AN APPLICATION THAT A TRANSCRIPT BE OBTAINED AT PUBLIC EXPENSE: IF YOU ARE BROKE THEN WHY HAVEN’T YOU ATTENDED COURT TO PROVE THIS?
Here is a judgment that contains a central irony. The applicant had failed to attend court to be examined about his means and as a result his passport was confiscated. His application to have the passport returned was refused. In…
THE APPELLATE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED THE APPELLANTS TO RUN A NEW ISSUE : THE ABILITY TO PAY COSTS IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR AND WAS NOT CONSIDERED PROPERLY
Here we have a case where the appellants were, initially, allowed to argue a point that had not been argued in the court below. The Court of Appeal was clear in its view that the judge should not have allowed…
NEW EDITION OF THE KING’S BENCH GUIDE: WHERE TO FIND IT AND THE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES
A new edition of the King’s Bench Guide has been published. There are many useful points for litigators, in particular using CE-FILE, the new email addresses and some corrected links. “The Guide does not have the status of a Practice…
PROVING THINGS 282: THE INJURED CLAIMANT ADDUCED NO EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE (SOMETHING ABOUT PLEADINGS TOO…)
Here we look at a Privy Council decision in a personal injury case. The claimant lost at first instance, the defendant having elected to call no evidence. What is interesting about this case is the constant motif in the judgment…
EXPERT WATCH 41: THE COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO OVERTURN A DECISION WHERE THE “WRONG” TYPE OF JOINT EXPERT WAS INSTRUCTED
This is an unusual case where, after the event, a party to the litigation argued that the court had relied on the “wrong” type of expert evidence. An educational psychologist had been instructed as a joint expert whereas what was…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANCE OF SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WITHIN THE TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE “BEAR TRAP” IN WAITING
The back to basics point today is based on a recent case which shows the importance of serving the particulars of claim within the four month period allowed for service of the claim form. The claimant served the particulars three…
COST BITES 362: WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED ON A DISBURSEMENT: READ THE JUDGMENT
An earlier post related to this case which deals with the question of whether a party should provide a breakdown of an invoice from a translator. Ben Williams KC has kindly provided me with a copy of the judgment. “In my judgment,…
THE QUESTION OF THE CLAIMANT’S CAPACITY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH AS A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: THE COURT SHOULD APPOINT A LITIGATION FRIEND – THIS DOES NOT PREJUDICE THE DEFENDANT’S POSITION
Here we have a case where a defendant appealed against a decision it agreed with. The judge found that the claimant had capacity and did not require a Litigation Friend. However the defendant’s issue was with the very decision to…
COST BITES 361: THE STEPS A CLAIMANT SHOULD TAKE IF THEY WISH TO RECOVER PRE-ALLOCATION COSTS ON THE BASIS THAT THE CASE WOULD HAVE PROCEEDED IN THE FAST TRACK
I am grateful to Andrew Hogan for sending me a copy of this decision which relates to pre-allocation costs in housing cases. It deals with the question of how the court should address pre-allocation costs where a housing disrepair claim…
EXPERT WATCH 39: WHEN THE HOME SECRETARY DID NOT CHALLENGE EXPERT EVIDENCE SHE CANNOT BE THAT SURPRISED WHEN THE COURT ACCEPTS IT
We are looking at another case where a party failed to challenge expert evidence. The Court of Appeal was clear in its view that if fault lay anywhere it was with the appellant’s failure to challenge the expert evidence that…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY II: WITNESS CREDIBILITY: THE PRINCIPLES IN TUI -V- GRIFFITHS DID NOT IMPACT ON THE ASSESSMENT OF A LAY WITNESS
Here we have an unusual argument where an appellant attempted to use the decision in Tui -v- Griffiths to argue that a tribunal should not have accepted the evidence of a lay witness. The evidence of the witness in question…
COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ABOUT LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER LEADING TO CLAIMANT BEING ENTITLED TO COSTS TO BE ASSESSD
It is a busy day for Court of Appeal decisions on procedure. Here we have an important judgment on Part 36. What are the costs consequences if a defendant makes a Part 36 offer when the case is subject to…
IMPORTANT COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: A CLAIM IS BROUGHT WHEN A CLAIM FORM IS SENT TO THE COURT EVEN IF IT DOES NOT HAVE THE CORRECT ISSUE FEE
This Court of Appeal decision today clarifies the position when a claimant files a claim at court but mistakenly does not pay the correct fee. The Court held that the claim was “delivered” when the claim was filed at court….
CCC AND LOST YEARS IN THE SUPREME COURT: THE POTENTIAL STING IN THE TAIL FOR CLAIMANTS: “WAGES IN HEAVEN SHOULD NOT BE AWARDED WHEN THEY ARE NEEDED ON EARTH”
Here we are looking at some of the observations made by Lord Burrows in the recent judgment given by the Supreme Court. In the short term it is good news for seriously injured child claimants. However Lord Burrows has laid…
MAZUR MATTERS 53: JUDGE REFUSES TO GRANT A SPECIFIC OR GENERAL EXEMPTION TO AN EXPERIENCED LEGAL EXECUTIVE
One of the issues that has followed the Mazur decision arises from the fact that the statute gives the court a power to grant an exemption. Here the judge considered whether the power to grant an exemption should be granted…
THE SECRETARY OF STATE REQUIRED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “AN APPALLING MANIFESTATION OF A LAX CULTURE OF NON-COMPLIANCE”
For (at least) the third time in recent weeks we are considering defaults or mistakes made on behalf of a Secretary of State. The delays and mistakes here were manifold. The Secretary of State was fortunate in obtaining an extension…
MAZUR MATTERS 52: AND NOW WE WAIT… STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION AND “DANCING ON A PINHEAD” : SOME USEFUL LINKS
The arguments in the Mazur appeal have been completed. The profession now awaits. I was able to watch the first 1 1/2 days. I have to say that phrase “dancing on a pinhead” came to mind when I was…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE COURT OF APPEAL ON THE CREDIBILITY OF AN EXPERT WHO HAD HIDDEN THE FACT THAT THEY HAD BEEN A COLLEAGUE OF THE DEFENDANT (FEBRUARY 2017)
Here we look at a case where the Court of Appeal addressed the issue of witness credibility head on. An expert giving evidence for the defendant in a clinical negligence case failed to disclose the fact that he and the…
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 FIXED COSTS AND LATE ACCEPTANCE HEARD – DECISION PENDING (PLUS A FINAL PLUG FOR THE WEBINAR ON PART 36 ON THE 26th FEBRUARY 2026)
The Court of Appeal has heard an appeal against the decision in Laura Attersley v UK Insurance Limited [2025] EWHC 884 (KB). This is an interesting decision on Part 36. I understand that judgment is pending. This was one of many…
COST BITES 359: A SOLICITOR’S FAILURE TO SIGN THE COSTS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY DID NOT RENDER THE BILL INVALID (THIS MAY EXPLAIN WHY BIRMINGHAM COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE ANY MONEY…)
Here we have an appeal by a paying party on a highly technical point. The appeal failed. It highlights the dangers of (i) permitting a default certificate to be entered; (ii) taking technical points which (as the Court observed) led…
MAZUR MATTERS 51: WHY THE HEARING IS NOT BEING “LIVESTREAMED”: A QUICK WORD FOR THE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS
The appeal in the decision of Mazur -v- Charles Russell Speechlys LLP continues today. There were (I am told) some 400 people watching remotely. This has not stopped a large number of people online putting forward (sometimes bizarre) theories as to…
MAZUR MATTERS 50: THE CALM BEFORE THE STORM: GETTING READY FOR THE APPEAL THIS AFTERNOON: BUT IF YOU WANT TO WATCH – YOU HAVE TO ASK…
The appeal in the decision of Mazur -v- Charles Russell Speechlys LLP begins at 2.00 today, it continues on Wednesday and Thursday. It is not being live streamed (To be fair I have been sent a link – the Court…
COST BITES 357: DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER’S FEE? NOTE OF THE JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (AND THAT PERENNIAL ISSUE OF WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED…)
I am grateful to Ben Williams KC for sending me a note of the judgment yesterday which was the appeal against the decision in Santiago v Motor Insurers’ Bureau (The County Court at Central London, 22nd February 2025). The second time…
COST BITES 356: DO FIXED COSTS APPLY WHEN THE CASE IS TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM A FIXED COSTS REGIME TO ONE WHERE COSTS ARE “AT LARGE”
Here we are considering a Court of Appeal decision about what costs order should be made when an action is transferred from a fixed costs regime to one where costs are at large. On the face of it the decision…
SERVICE POINTS 28 : EFFECTIVE SERVICE ON A RESIDENCE IN ENGLAND COULD NOT TAKE PLACE WHEN THE DEFENDANT WAS IN FACT ABROAD – AND LEGALLY PREVENTED FROM RETURNING
We are looking at a Court of Appeal judgment today which overturned a finding that a defendant had been properly served at an address in England. The defendant was not living in England when proceedings were served and, indeed, there…
You must be logged in to post a comment.