WITNESS STATEMENTS IN FOREIGN LANGUAGES: CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE IN APRIL
The 113th update to Practice Direction Amendments introduces important changes to to witness statements in foreign languages (Coming into force from the 6th April 2020). CHANGES TO PRACTICE DIRECTION 22 – STATEMENTS OF TRUTH There are amendments and addition…
STRIKING OUT POINTS OF DISPUTE BECAUSE OF LACK OF PARTICULARISATION: PARTIES HAVE TO KNOW WHAT IS IN DISPUTE AND WHY
In Ainsworth v Stewarts Law LLP [2020] EWCA Civ 178 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision striking out part of points of dispute. “Common sense dictates that the points of dispute must be drafted in a way which enables…
NO PROTECTIVE COSTS ORDER FOR APPELLANT IN ACCOMMODATION APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In the judgment in Swift v Carpenter [2020] EWCA Civ 165 today the Court of Appeal rejected the claimant’s application for a Protected Costs Order. There are important observations on (i) the scope of Protected Costs Orders; (ii) the exercise…
PLEADINGS ARE IMPORTANT: NO LUCK IN TRYING TO ARGUE AN UNPLEADED CASE ON APPEAL: NOT A “DRY, TECHNICAL POINT”
In Kalma & Ors v African Minerals Ltd & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 144 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal brought by unsuccessful claimants. In the judgment it was observed that the claimants were attempting to run a case…
THE DANGERS OF MAKING ORDERS FOR SPLIT TRIALS: DECISION AT TRIAL SET ASIDE DUE TO A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY
The judgment of Mr Justice Murray today in Sharn Panesar Ltd v Pistachios In The Park Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 194 (QB) illustrates some of the dangers of holding a trial on a preliminary issue. In this case a…
INDEMNITY COSTS ON THE GROUNDS OF CONDUCT: FAILURE TO BEAT A DEFENDANT’S PART 36 OFFER: A GARDEN THAT GETS MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE…
The Court of Appeal decision in Lejonvarn v Burgess & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 114 is the second time this case, about a garden, has been on appeal. On this occasion the Court of Appeal held that the claimants’ conduct…
JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT – AFTER DEFENCE IS DUE BUT WHEN DEFENCE IS FILED LATE: ISSUE TO BE DETERMINED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
An earlier post dealt with rule changes that come into force in April in relation to default judgment being entered. The new rules make it clear that judgment cannot be entered if the court has received an acknowledgement of service…
APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: COURT’S DISCRETION EXERCISED AGAINST THE APPLICANT
In Hussain v Medical Defence Union & Anor [2020] EWHC 157 (QB) Clive Sheldon QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused an application for pre-action disclosure. This judgment makes it clear that pre-action disclosure is, ultimately, a matter of…
PROVING THINGS 172: SPECULATION BY THE DEFENDANT IS NOT EVIDENCE: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE
The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Morrison v Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 91 (QB) is another illustration of a party asserting something but having no evidence to support it. This time it was a defendant whose…
JUDGMENT MUST GIVE REASONS (AND NOT SIMPLY INCORPORATE A SKELETON ARGUMENT): THE BAKERS CAN CHALLENGE THEIR ELECTRICITY BILL
In Fine Lady Bakeries Ltd v EDF Energy Customers Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 87 (QB) Mrs Justice Farbey allowed an appeal against a Deputy District Judge who had granted summary judgment. The case emphasises the need for a judge…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: THE AWARD SHOULD BE THE SAME: IT DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE RICH OR POOR
The Privy Council decision in Attorney General of St Helena v AB & Ors (St Helena) [2020] UKPC 1 is of considerable interest to personal injury practitioners. Issues relating to awards made for pain and suffering are rarely discussed at…
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: “WAREHOUSING” A CLAIM IS NOT AN ALWAYS ABUSE OF PROCESS (AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT IN ANY EVENT)
In the judgment today in Alibrahim v Asturion Fondation [2020] EWCA Civ 32 the Court of Appeal confirmed that the court should not have struck out a claim that had been left dormant for a period. “Striking out was a…
DISCLOSURE OF SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE LATE: THE FACT THAT THE GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE IS NOT ENOUGH: AN INTERESTING HIGH COURT DECISION
Angus Fergusson has kindly sent me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Grant -v- Newport City Council [2018] EWHC 3813, it is an interesting case where the judge, on appeal, upheld a decision to refuse…
A DECISION THAT WAS “UNJUST BECAUSE OF SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY AND MULTIPLE ERRORS OF LAW”: WHEN DECISIONS ARE NOT BASED ON THE EVIDENCE
I have hesitated before writing about the judgment in H v F [2020] EWHC 86 (Fam). The judgment reviews a highly disturbing first instance decision. I know that many family law commentators have already commented on the case and I…
ADEQUATE TIME ESTIMATES: WAS THIRTY MINUTES LONG ENOUGH?
One other aspect of the judgment HHJ Lethem in Ivanoy -v- Lubble (Central London County Court 17th January 2020) relates to time estimates. It highlights the importance of giving appropriate time estimates, reviewing the estimate if the matter becomes complex and the…
CLAIMANT WHO FAILS TO OBTAIN COURT FEE REMISSION – CAN RECOVER THE COURT FEE ON APPEAL: CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION ON APPEAL
I am grateful to Jon Heath from Levins,solicitors, for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Lethem in Ivanov -v- Lubble (Central London County Court 17th January 2020). This relates to the issue of whether a claimant, eligible…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: “THE KANGAROO COURTS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM”
In January I wrote “I am starting to lose count of the number of times the Court of Appeal has overturned decisions committing people to prison because of very basic and fundamental failures of procedure. It is as though all…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 76: APPEALS – ASKING THE JUDGE FOR REASONS: “EMBARRASSMENT” IS NO EXCUSE NOT TO
The judgment in Fattahi v Charles Grosvenor Ltd [2019] EWHC 3497 (QB) also highlights the advisability of an appellant, arguing that a decision was not properly reasoned, to ask the original judge for further reasons. “I have been unable to…
“THEY LOST”: THE DANGERS OF OVERCONFIDENCE IN CORRESPONDENCE
“Never write anything you will be embarrassed by the court reading” is an essential piece of advice for all lawyers (and one I suspect we have all, occasionally, breached). An example can be seen in the opening lines of the…
PART 36, FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIMS AND PRE-ACTION SETTLEMENT: A POINT FOR BOTH CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS TO WATCH
The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Kore v Brocklebank [2019] EWHC 3491 (QB) raises some interesting issues in relation to Part 36 and fatal accident claims. It means that both claimants and defendants will have to take considerable care…
APPEALING A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT IS NOT A JAMBOREE: APPELLANT HAS TO STATE WHAT THEY ARE APPEALING AND HEARING IS CONFINED TO THOSE MATTERS
In PME v The Scout Association [2019] EWHC 3421 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart upheld the decision of Master Leonard in relation to the scope of an appeal from a costs officer. “The consequences of the Appellant’s case are wholly undesirable….
INTEREST ON PART 36 OFFERS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: “THE LAW REPORTS ARE OVER-FULL OF CASES IN WHICH PARTIES MADE OFFERS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF PART 36 AND THEN UNSUCCESSFULLY SOUGHT TO OBTAIN THE PART 36 BENEFITS LATER”
In King -v- City of London Corporation [2019] EWCA Civ 2266 the Court of Appeal set out the position in relation to whether an offer exclusive of interest can be made. I am grateful to Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: PART 36: THE GROWTH IN CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFERS – AND WHY THE CONSEQUENCES USUALLY APPLY
Looking back it is clear that this has been a very busy year for cases on Part 36. Part of the reason for this has been the growth in cases relating to claimant’s offers. There are a number of key…
APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT’S UPHILL STRUGGLE
The second aspect of the judgment in Essex County Council & Ors v Davies & Ors [2019] EWHC 3443 I want to look at is the defendants’ appeal in relation to damages. This case reiterates the difficulties (for claimants and defendants)…
CORRECT INTEREST RATE ON COSTS WHEN CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO AWARD 10% OVER BASE
There are several interesting aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in Essex County Council & Ors v Davies & Ors [2019] EWHC 3443. Here I want to look at the part of the judgment that deals with the…
LITIGATION: NO DUTY TO THE OTHER SIDE IN LITIGATION TO PUT FORWARD YOUR BEST EVIDENCE
The Court of Appeal judgment this morning in Revenue And Customs v Charles (t/a Boston Computer Group Europe) [2019] EWCA Civ 2176 contains some important observations in relation to the duties that litigating parties owe to each other. “If…
HIGH COURT ALLOWS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL FAILING A FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE ON TIME
In Badejo v Cranston [2019] EWHC 3343 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt overturned the decision of a Circuit Judge and granted relief from sanctions to a claimant who had failed to pay the trial fee in time. One issue related to…
MAKING FINDINGS ON THE BASIS OF THE LIST OF DOCUMENTS ALONE: THE MACKENZIE PERPLEX
There is one aspect of the judgement in Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (Gb) Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2110 that requires a little more attention. That is is the question of how parties, faced with the absence of documents and where…
WHEN SHOULD A JUDGE DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES DUE TO ABSENT EVIDENCE? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (Gb) Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2110 makes some important points in relation to civil evidence. It reviews the law relating to the drawing of adverse inferences due…
NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE’S DECISION
In L’Oreal (UK) Ltd & Anor v Liqwd Inc & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1943 the Court of Appeal confirmed the trial judge’s decision not to admit new evidence that a defendant attempted to introduce after judgment was handed down….
THE SELF INFLICTED WOUNDS OF A “TRUSTED BRAND”/”CAPRICIOUS MID-VICTORIAN FACTORY-OWNER”: THE DANGERS OF PUTTING YOUR CASE TOO HIGH
The judgment of Lord Justice Coulson rejecting the Post Office’s application for permission to appeal is available on “Post Office Trial”, a case that has already been looked at several times on this blog. Here we have a critical appraisal…
DRAFTING SKELETON ARGUMENTS: ROUNDING UP THE POSTS
Here we look at some guidance, and some previous posts on this blog, about drafting skeleton arguments. “Sir James Hunt has told us of the (unattributed) judicial reaction on receiving a 35 page document which was to the effect…
FIXED COSTS NOT OVERTURNED BY THE TERMS OF AN AMBIGUOUS PART 36 OFFER: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In the judgment today in Ho v Adelekun [2019] EWCA Civ 1988 the Court of Appeal held that fixed costs still applied to a case where an offer of settlement did not expressly refer to costs being fixed. “…parties who…
AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL ON A COSTS BUDGETING DECISION: SHOULD A QC BE ALLOWED – OR IS THAT A LEADING QUESTION?
The case of Easteye Ltd v Malhotra Property Investments Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 2820 (Ch) is unusual in that it is an appeal against a costs budgeting decision. Nugee J refused the claimant’s appeal against the District Judge’s decision…
STAGE 3 PROCEEDINGS AND LATE SERVICE OF EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
The judgment of the Court of Appeal yesterday in Wickes Building Supplies Ltd v Blair [2019] EWCA Civ 1934 is an important one in relation to late service of evidence and Stage 3 of the Protocol. It shows the importance…
WHEN “ROBUST” CASE MANAGEMENT TURNS INTO APPARENT BIAS: HIGH COURT OVERTURNS DIRECTIONS: THE TALE OF THE ORGAN GRINDER
In Dorman & Ors v Clinton Devon Farms Partnership [2019] EWHC 2988 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini allowed an appeal against directions made by a Circuit Judge. He also upheld an appeal against that judges refusal to recuse himself on…
PROVING THINGS 168: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION:STATEMENTS OF OPINION OR BELIEF CARRY NO WEIGHT
The Court of Appeal judgment today in Irani v Duchon [2019] EWCA Civ 1846 adds to the Proving Things series in relation to a failure to establish key matters at trial (it also gives me an opportunity to promote the…
THE RIDICULOUS RULES ABOUT PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: DOES THE RULES COMMITTEE JUST NOT LISTEN (OR JUST NOT CARE)?
The previous post in this case on the judgment in Pepe’s Piri Piri Ltd & Anor v Muhammad Ali Junaid Food Trends Ltd (Now Dissolved) & Ors[2019] EWHC 2769 (QB) highlights the problems posed by one of the most ridiculous rules…
INSURER NOT LIABLE TO PAY CLAIMANTS’ COSTS: TRAVELERS INSURANCE DECISION OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT
In the judgment today in Travelers Insurance Company Ltd v XYZ [2019] UKSC 48 the Supreme Court held that the insurer was not liable to pay the costs of those claimants who had proceeded (unknowingly) against uninsured defendants. This is…
APPEAL ALLOWED WHEN THE TRIAL JUDGE OVERSTEPPED THE LINE
In C (A Child) (Judicial Conduct) [2019] EWFC B53 HHJ Rogers allowed an appeal in a family case. The unusual aspect of the appeal was that the main issue was the conduct of the trial judge and the appeal on…
TRAWLING THROUGH THE CPR: FIXED COSTS CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL: COUNSEL’S FEES INCLUDED IN REGIME: CONSTRUING THE CPR AS A WHOLE
I am grateful to barrister Sarah Robson for sending me a copy of the judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Aldred -v- Cham [2019] EWCA Civ 1780. It is one of those occasions where the Court of Appeal…
CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT IS ENFORCEABLE AFTER DEATH: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT TODAY
In Higgins & Co Lawyers Ltd -v- Evans [2019] EWHC 2809 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini overturned a decision that a conditional fee agreement was not enforceable after death. THE CASE The deceased had signed a CFA agreement with the…
COURT HAS JURISDICTION TO MAKE AN INTERIM ORDER AS TO COSTS AFTER CLAIMANT HAS ACCEPTED A PART 36 OFFER: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In Global Assets Advisory Services Ltd & Anor v Grandlane Developments Ltd & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1764 the Court of Appeal confirmed that the court can make an interim order for costs after a claimant has accepted a Part…
“NOT ALL JUDGES OR COUNSEL ARE HUMOURLESS AUTOMATONS”: NO JUDICIAL BIAS WHEN EVIDENCE GIVEN BY WAY OF A SONG
It is not often that appeals over planning decisions make their way to this blog. It must be even rarer for such appeals to consider the question and appropriateness of humour (and song) in the judicial process. That is what…
QOCS IN “MIXED “CASES: THE COURT OF APPEAL SPEAKS
In the judgment today in Brown v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1724 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of QOCS in “mixed cases”. The judgment requires careful reading. Generally speaking all personal…
THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES: A RUNNING ACCOUNT: READ THEM ALL HERE
The “Back to Basics” series, as the title suggests, deals with some of the basic elements of civil procedure. It covers everything from applications and bundles to the taking of witness statements. The titles are often prompted by elements…
CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS (YET AGAIN…): COMMITTAL ORDER SET ASIDE BECAUSE DEFENDANT WAS NOT LEGALLY REPRESENTED
Yet another example of the difficulties arising in civil committal proceedings arises in the Court of Appeal decision today in O (Committal: Legal Representation) [2019] EWCA Civ 1721. Legal representation, if requested, is essential if committal proceedings are to be valid….
GILHAM -v- MINISTRY OF JUSTICE: A REMINDER OF THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINTS: “MISCARRIAGES OF JUSTICE WERE LIKELY”
The Supreme Court judgment yesterday in Gilham v Ministry of Justice [2019] UKSC 44 provides a landmark ruling on the issue that judges are “workers” and entitled to the protection of the Employment Rights Act 1996. There will be many…
THE TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE LEADS TO QOCS BEING DISAPPLIED
In Haider v DSM Demolition Ltd [2019] EWHC 2712 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles refused a claimant’s appeal against a finding that the defendant was not negligent. He granted the defendant relief from sanctions and allowed an appeal against a…
REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL: “THE SANCTION WAS WHOLLY DISPROPORTIONATE AND IT WAS WRONG NOT TO GRANT RELIEF”
In Michael v Lillitos [2019] EWHC 2716 (QB) Mrs Justice Steyn overturned a decision refusing relief from sanctions. The Appellant had made payments by cheque rather than by bank transfer. It is also an important example of the pitfalls caused…
You must be logged in to post a comment.