COST BITES 395: A RETAINER WAS NOT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE TERMS IN RELATION TO HOURLY RATES RENDERED IT TOO UNCERTAIN (COURT OF APPEAL DECISION YESTERDAY)
This appeal has been much discussed in the specialist press. A solicitor’s client argued that the terms of a retainer rendered in a Contentious Business Agreement. This would have given her greater scope to dispute the bills. The Court of…
A CLAIMANT’S SUCCESSFUL APPEAL IN A HOUSING DISREPAIR CLAIM: THE DISTRICT JUDGE WAS WRONG TO ALLOCATE THE MATTER TO THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK…
I am grateful to Craig Leigh, for sending me a copy of this judgment in relation to an appeal about allocation in a housing disrepair case. It deals with important principles relating to the allocation of housing disrepair cases. The…
COST BITES 394: COURT OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT LANDLORD IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER THE COSTS: AWARD OF INTEREST ALSO OVERTURNED
This is a case where a decision as to costs and interests was overturned on appeal. The Circuit Judge found that the claimant landlord had no entitlement to claim costs under the terms of the lease. Further the claim for…
AN EASY MISTAKE TO MAKE: HOW A CRUCIAL TIME LIMIT FOR APPEALING WAS MISSED: MISLABELLING OF THE FILES: THIS WAS NOT A “MINOR ERROR…”
Here we look at how a simple mistake in the naming of a file led to a potentially disastrous problem when it led to an appeal being out of time. The wrong documents were sent to the court when an…
AN APPEAL OVER A TIME ESTIMATE FOR TRIAL: THIS SHOULD NOT LAST 15 DAYS, NOR WILL IT BE DONE IN 5: EIGHT DAYS REMAINS THE CORRECT CONCLUSION
This blog has covered issues relating to time estimates many times. I cannot recall, however, a case where there has been an appeal over a judicial determination of a time estimate for a trial. We have such a case here. …
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: A LITIGANT CANNOT APPLY TO SET ASIDE A DECISION MADE WITHOUT A HEARING WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THIS AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SUBMISSIONS
Here we look at a recent decision that has major practical implications for anyone making an application, or anyone disgruntled with a court decision. The applicant asked, specifically, for an application to be considered on paper. The matter was considered…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 79: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANT’S AMENDMENT APPLICATION BECAUSE THERE WERE “REASONABLY ARGUABLE” ISSUES IN RELATION TO LIMITATION
Here we continue the theme of today in looking at applications to amend. In this case the application was unsuccessful because it sought to raise issues that may be subject to a limitation defence. The judge rejected the argument that…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 15: THE STUDENTS LOAN COMPANY MAY BE AN “EMANATION OF THE STATE”: SOME INTERESTING ISSUES HERE: THESE ARE ISSUES OF LAW – NOT ONE ON WHICH A WITNESS CAN EXPRESS AN OPINION OR VIEW…
The Court of Appeal considered some interesting issues in this case. Firstly in relation to the direct applicability of EC directives; secondly in relation to whether a particular body was an emanation of the state. It is not clear how…
SERVICE POINTS 44: LOCAL AUTHORITY FAILS TO SERVE PROPERLY ON INTERESTED PARTIES TO PROPOSED APPEAL: THE WHOLE APPEAL FAILS
Here we have another case of a failure to serve a claim form properly. This time a local authority failed to serve interested parties to an appeal because, rather than sending the claim forms to them personally, they were sent…
COST BITES 391: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION THAT SOLICITOR’S BILL SHOULD BE ASSESSED AT “NIL”: THERE IS NO “RESTITUTIONARY” RIGHT TO DAMAGES WHERE THE CFA ITSELF MADE EXPRESS PROVISIONS FOR THESE CIRCUMSTANCES
I wrote about this case in August 2025 “Here we have a case that could well bring tears to the eyes of any litigator who works on a conditional fee basis. For the second time, on appeal, the claimant solicitor’s…
COST BITES 390: THE COURT OF APPEAL, “LATE” WITNESS STATEMENTS, THE COPPERS AND THE COSTS
We looked earlier at the Court of Appeal decision yesterday in relation to relief from sanctions. Here we look at the judgment in relation to the costs of the hearing below and of the appeal itself. As we shall see…
THE COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED DEFENDANT TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED “LATE”: THE CRUCIAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN “IN TIME” AND “OUT OF TIME” APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME
I am grateful to Barrister Simon Brindle for sending me a copy of the judgment of this Court of Appeal judgment given yesterday. It relates primarily to the major distinction between an application made “ahead” of time and one made…
YOU CAN’T DELIBERATELY DECIDE TO IGNORE COURT (OR TRIBUNAL) DIRECTIONS: HMRC INVOLVED IN “CONTUMELIOUS” CONDUCT, ITS (LATE) APOLOGY GIVEN LITTLE WEIGHT
Here we have a case of a litigant (the HMRC no less) making a deliberate decision to ignore Tribunal directions. It then attempted to justify that decision by stating “That was a deliberate and proportionate case management decision, taken in…
COST BITES 389: THE SRA IS LIABLE TO PAY THE COSTS OF AN APPEAL WHERE IT WAS THE ORIGINAL APPELLANT ITS POSITION IS “MORE AKIN TO THAT OF A NORMAL LITIGANT”
Here we consider an issue that has some relevance to the profession as a whole. Should the SRA be liable to pay the costs of an appeal from the SDT? In this case the SRA was the instigator of the…
WOULD BE APPELLANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH SEVEN DAY DEADLINE: ARGUMENTS ABOUT “PUBLIC INTEREST” FAILS TO TAKE OFF: THE IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING TIME LIMITS…
Here we have a case where the “would be” appellant failed to obtain permission to appeal out of time. They failed to notice that the time limits for appealing this specific type of decision had been changed two months prior…
MAZUR MATTERS 62: THE REVISED COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT: SOME SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS
There is a revised version of the Court of Appeal judgment in Mazur. Some paragraphs were amended slightly (but significantly). These amendments do not appeal to have made their way to the version of the judgment that is publicly available….
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 76: APPLYING FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND THE DAY BEFORE THE COURT OF APPEAL HEARING, WITH NO NOTICE GIVEN: HAVE A GUESS HOW THIS WENT…
There have been quite a few cases about pleading recently. This case is interesting because it makes the point that after a default judgment is entered a claimant is only entitled to have damages assessed on the basis of their…
THE POSITION FOLLOWING DEATH OF A PARTY: THE FAMILY PROCEDURE RULES CANNOT “BORROW” PROVISIONS FROM THE CPR: APPEAL STRUCK OUT
This blog has looked, many times, at the problems caused by the death of a party during the course of litigation. Here we look at a problem that occurred in the Family Court. The fundamental point here is that the …
COST BITES 388: A COMPANY CANNOT CLAIM ITS OWN EMPLOYEE’S TIME AS LEGAL COSTS WHEN IT WAS REPRESENTED ON AN APPEAL
Here we have a reiteration of a long established principle as to costs. A company can only recover legal costs on an assessment, not the costs of being a litigant. Here the appellant sought to recover both. The Costs Judge…
COST BITES 387: THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION THAT THERE MUST BE A DETAILED ASSESSMENT WHERE A CASE LASTS MORE THAN ONE DAY: JUDGE SUMMARILY ASSESSES COSTS AFTER A THREE DAY HEARING
Here we have a case where there was an argument whether there should be a summary or detailed assessment. The judge made it clear that there is no presumption against summary assessment simply because a hearing lasted more than one…
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…
You must be logged in to post a comment.