RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN THE COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: BUDGETING AT TRIAL IS A FAIRLY HOPELESS TASK
There is much to learn from the decision of Mr Justice Ritchie in Tan v Idlbi & Anor [2023] EWHC 2840 (KB). The claimant was unsuccessful in an application for relief from sanctions following late service of the costs budget….
COURT REFUSES TO GRANT AN ORDER FOR A GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: INCORRECT PROCEDURE; COSTS AND “WHACK -A-MOLE” CONSIDERED
Several kind people have sent me a copy of the decision in Abbott & Ors v Ministry of Defence [2023] EWHC 2839 (KB). This is an unusual case because, despite the claimant and defendant being in agreement, the court did…
COST BITES 117: THE COURT CAN ORDER A PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS WHERE THE SCHEDULE IS HIGH BUT NOT EXCESSIVE
In South Tees Development Corporation & Anor v PD Teesport Ltd & Anor (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 2270 (Ch) Mr Justice Trower rejected an argument that a payment of account should not be made because the schedule in support was…
“RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS” NOT REQUIRED: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDER WHEN CPR 3.9 CRITERIA APPLY: ITS NOT ALWAYS PLANE SAILING…
In Lufthansa Technik AG v Panasonic Avionics Corporation & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 1273 the Court of Appeal addressed the difficult issue of when a breach led to a need to apply from relief from sanctions. It found that, on…
INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: RECEIVING PARTY CAN ASK (AND RECEIVE) MORE THAN ONCE
I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon for sending me a note of the judgment of Master MCloud in Trotman -v- Master Brickwork London Essex Limited, a copy of which is available here. Trotman – final judgment of…
A SECOND ACTION ON A DIFFERENT ISSUE TO THE FIRST SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL NOT TOO KEEN ON “SHADOW BOXING” IN CIVIL LITIGATION
In Orji & Anor v Nagra & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 1289 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that an action should be struck out as an abuse of process. The Court rejected the defendant’s contention that the action…
LITIGATORS: IF YOU DON’T PAY YOUR EXPERTS AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO TRIAL, DON’T BE SURPRISED IF YOUR ACTION FAILS
The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Doyle v HDI Global Specialty SE [2023] EWHC 2722 (KB) shows a surprising set of facts when an expert wrote directly to the court. The expert made it clear that he was not…
THE “SLIP RULE” CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: ALSO THE COURT’S INHERENT POWERS TO VARY ITS ORDERS (APPLICANT UNSUCCESSFUL ON BOTH COUNTS…)
The “slip rule” in civil procedure is often mentioned, but rarely considered at length. There is a detailed consideration of the rule and relevant authorities in the judgment of Mr Justice Henshaw in Deutsche Bank AG v Sebastian Holdings Inc…
WINDING UP PETITION NEEDS TO BE ISSUED IN LOCAL COURT: TYNE FOR PETITIONERS TO CHANGE THEIR PRACTICES
In The One Collection Real Estate Ltd v Insolvency & Law Ltd [2023] EWHC 2673 (Ch). HHJ Kramer held that a winding up petition should be issued and heard in the circuit that has closest links to the case. A block policy…
CLAIMANTS NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE EVIDENCE WOULD NOT ASSIST THE COURT IN ITS TASK (WITH A FEW OTHER REASONS)
In Wambura & Ors v Barrick TZ Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB) Master Stevens rejected the claimants’ application to call an expert. The judge contains a detailed consideration of the law and authorities relating to the court’s discretion…
“A COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE WAY OF PREPARING FOR AN IMPORTANT HEARING”: NON-COMPLIANT AND INCOMPLETE BUNDLES: WITNESS STATEMENTS IMPROPERLY PREPARED
The judgment of HHJ Pearce in Shobeiry v Patel [2023] EWHC 2549 (KB) shows how failing to comply with the rules can lead to major problems in relation to hearings. Here there was non-compliance with the rules relating to bundles,…
WANT TO OBTAIN AN ORDER AFTER RECEIVING A DRAFT JUDGMENT? BETTER READ THIS
I have been kindly sent a message from Tim Lord KC which sets out observations made by Miles J in relation to Practice Direction 40E., in particular 4.4.. The Practice Direction deals with the handing down of judgments. 4.4. imposes…
CLAIM FORM SERVED LATE: NO EXTENSION OF TIME GIVEN: PLANNING TO FAIL
In Telford And Wrekin Council v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor [2023] EWHC 2439 (Admin) Mr Justice Eyre held that a claim form had been served late. Further the claimant did not come within…
PARTY NOT PERMITTED TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM OTHER CASES AS HEARSAY EVIDENCE
One of the issues decided by Mr Justice Mellor in Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2023] EWHC 2408 (Ch) related to the attempts by a party (COPA) to adduce expert evidence from other trials by way of hearsay evidence…
DELAYS, ADJOURNMENTS AND THE SIZE OF THE TRIAL BUNDLE: NOT JUST AN ACADEMIC PROBLEM: ELECTRONIC BUNDLES DOESN’T MEAN YOU CAN JUST THROW EVERYTHING IN
The judgment of Mr Justice Constable in Innovate Pharmaceuticals Ltd v University of Portsmouth Higher Education Corporation [2023] EWHC 2394 (TCC) contains another interesting insight into the preparation of trial bundles and how that, in itself, can become highly contentious. …
CLAIMANT HAD NOT BREACHED THEIR DUTY OF DISCLOSURE: A PARTY DOES NOT HAVE “CONTROL” OF THEIR PARTNER’S FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS
The judgment of Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Morgan-Rowe v Woodgate [2023] EWHC 2375 (KB) makes some important points about the duty of disclosure. A party giving disclosure doesn’t have to disclose details of their spouses’/partners accounts. “A married couple…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 99: THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TOP RIGHT HAND CORNER OF A WITNESS STATEMENT AND AFFIDAVIT
The purpose of this series is to look at the most basic elements of civil procedure. One, very common, omission practitioners make is to fail to follow the mandatory requirements of Practice Direction 32 in relation to the information on…
“FORENSIC SPEED DATING” IS NOT A DESIRABLE EXERCISE: PRACTITIONERS SHOULD LIMIT THE NUMBER OF AUTHORITIES CITED
In a post-script to the judgment in Invest Bank PSC v El-Husseini & Ors [2023] EWHC 2302 (Comm) Stephen Houseman KC, sitting as High Court Judge, raised concerns over the number of authorities cited and the impact this has on…
SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS: SECTION 1140 OF THE COMPANIES ACT CAN BE USED TO SERVE A DIRECTOR RESIDENT ABROAD
In Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC v Shetty & Ors [2020] EWHC 3423 (Comm) [a case newly arrived on BAILII) Mr Justice Bryan held that s.1140 of the Companies Act 2006 can be used to serve proceedings on a director,…
BACK TO BASICS 98: COPYING THE OTHER SIDE INTO CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE COURT: IT IS DANGEROUS TO ASSUME THAT THESE ARE “ADMINISTRATIVE” MATTERS
I am grateful to barrister Justin Bates for drawing my attention to the final paragraphs of the judgment of Mr Justice Fordham in Debenham-Schon v Anchor Hanover Group [2021] EWHC 3023 (QB). It concerns the duty of a litigant to…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: AMBIGUITY IN DEFENDANT’S INSTRUCTIONS LED TO A (VERY RARE) CASE OF A CLAIMANT SUCCEEDING ON CPR 6.15
In London Fluid System Technologies Ltd & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v HM Revenue and Customs [2023] EWHC 2206 (Admin) Mrs Justice Foster made an order under CPR 6.15 when the claimants had mistakenly served the defendant at…
WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE AFTER JUDGMENT ON LIABILITY: A REVIEW OF THE CASES
We are looking again at the judgment of Jason Beer KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Celebrity Speakers Ltd v Daniel & Ors [2023] EWHC 2158 (KB). The judge had to consider what a defendant could argue as…
SECTION 33 APPLICATION IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: THE SINS OF THE SOLICITORS WERE NOT VISITED UPON THE CLAIMANT: ACTION ALLOWED TO PROCEED WHEN IT WAS 5 1/2 YEARS OUT OF TIME
We looked at the judgment in Shaw v Maguire (Re Preliminary Issues) [2023] EWHC 2155 (KB) in an earlier post where Master Cook held that the court had a discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 in a fatal…
CAN A CLAIMANT RECOVER MORE THAN THEY HAVE CLAIMED IN THE CLAIM FORM? YES THEY CAN…
We will be looking several aspects of the judgment of Jason Beer KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Celebrity Speakers Ltd v Daniel & Ors [2023] EWHC 2158 (KB). The first issue is a surprisingly common one. Can…
WHEN THE PARTIES COULD NOT AGREE WHO THE JOINT EXPERT SHOULD BE: FAILURE TO ENGAGE COST THE CLAIMANT
I cannot remember many judgments where the sole issue has been who the jointly instructed expert should be. However we have such a case in the judgment of Mr Nicholas Thompsell (sitting as a High Court judge) in Gheewalla v…
THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WERE TOO LONG, TOO CONFUSING AND DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES.
In Halsion Limited v St Thomas Street Development Limited [2023] EWHC 2045 (TCC) HHJ Cawson KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, struck out the claimant’s Particulars of Claim. The Particulars were too long and rambling and failed to comply…
ISSUING HIGH VALUE PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS: LOCAL IS USUALLY BEST: HIGH COURT DECISION
I am grateful to all those readers who brought my attention to the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB), in particular to the section on the wisdom of issuing in local…
COST BITES 96: A “REPLACEMENT” BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED
In Henderson and Jones Ltd v Stargunter Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 1849 (TCC) Neil Moody KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered whether a formal application for relief from sanctions was needed in a case where a party…
CLAIMANT FAILS TO SERVE THE CLAIM FORM PROPERLY: DEFENDANT FAILS TO NOTICE AND APPLIES TO STRIKE OUT ACTION: APPLICATION WAS UNNECCESARY & DEFENDANT NOT AWARDED COSTS
In Johnson v Devon And Cornwall Police & Ors [2023] EWHC 690 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) held that a defendant should have known that the proceedings against it had not been served properly. The…
COST BITES 94: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS: COSTS BUDGETING: BUDGETING OVERSPEND: THE DUTY TO WARN: THE APPROPRIATE SUCCESS FEE
In JXC v NIS [2023] EWHC 1000 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard considered issues relating to the recoverability of costs from the client over and above those recovered inter-partes. This case shows the importance of informing the client about the costs…
UNSUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT CANNOT INTRODUCE NEW EVIDENCE AFTER DRAFT JUDGMENT HANDED DOWN
In Manolete Partners Plc v White [2023] EWHC 1644 (Ch) HHJ Hodge KC (sitting as a High Court judge) considered an application to adduce further evidence after a draft judgment had been circulated. The application was refused. The respondent was…
COST BITES 93: SOLICITOR IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY FEES WHEN THEY WERE ACTING AS A PROFESSIONAL DEPUTY
The arguments raised in Brassington v Knights Professional Services Ltd (t/a Knights) (Re Court of Protection – Deputyship) [2023] EWHC 1568 (Ch) are interesting ones. HHJ Hodge KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) rejected the defendant’s assertions that a…
CLAIMANTS COME TO GRIEF OVER SERVICE OF UNSEALED CLAIM FORM: COURT OF APPEAL HOLD THAT CPR 3.10 APPLIES TO DEFENDANT’S MISCARACTERISED APPLICATION
It is rarely possible to get to the end of a month without some kind of discussion on this blog about service of the claim form. This month is no exception. In Pitalia & Anor v NHS England [2023] EWCA…
CLAIMANT’S CONVENTION CLAIM DISMISSED FOLLOWING ATTEMPT TO AMEND AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD
I am grateful to Barrister Katherine Howells for sending me a copy of the judgment in Hallett -v- TUI Airways Limited, a copy of which is available here Approved Judgment Hallett v TUI Airways Limited. The case deals with the…
COST BITES 90: CLAIMANTS LIABLE TO PAY 5% OF DEFENDANT’S COSTS: HUMAN RIGHTS, PERSONAL INJURIES AND “MIXED CLAIMS”
In ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Ors, Re Costs [2023] EWHC 1337 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill considered the liability of the claimants to pay costs in a “mixed claim” which was, primarily, a personal injury claim. She…
DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS CONSIDERED: THE MAKER OF THE STATEMENT MUST GIVE THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
The judgment in MF Tel Sarl v Visa Europe Ltd [2023] EWHC 1336 (Ch) records it was before “Master Marsh (sitting in retirement). However the Master has lost none of his pre-retirement keenness for ensuring that parties filing witness statements…
COST BITES 88: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR NON-PARTY DISCLOSURE AGAINST AN AGENCY SEEKING A BREAKDOWN OF FEES
I am grateful to Ryan O’Mara of Scott Rees & Co for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Jenkinson in Sephton -v- Anchor Hanover Group (County Court at Liverpool, 20th April 2023 – a copy of which…
PROVING THINGS 227: IF YOU ARE GOING TO ALLEGE THAT LAWYERS WERE NEGLIGENT IN NOT CALLING EVIDENCE THEN YOU REALLY SHOULD REALLY HAVE THAT EVIDENCE TO HAND
The decision in Murithi & Ors v AVH Legal LLP (t/a Tandem Law) & Ors [2023] EWHC 1245 (KB) has in some ways a profound irony. A case alleging negligence by lawyers for failing to call evidence itself failed because…
COST BITES 87: ISSUES RELATING TO EXCEEDING THE BUDGET LEFT TO THE COSTS JUDGE
In BES Commercial Electricity Ltd & Ors v Cheshire West And Chester Council [2022] EWHC 3333 (KB) Mr Justice Freedman declined an invitation to give any indication in relation to the defendant’s application to depart from its budget. The matter…
THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO STRIKE OUT A PROPERLY PLEADED CLAIM IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: JUDGE’S SHOULD BE ASTUTE TO DEAL WITH APPLICATIONS TO STRIKE OUT WHICH ARE, IN REALITY, APPLICATIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The judgment of Mr Justice Choudhury in Kasongo v CRBE Ltd & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 557 demonstrates the danger when a defendant makes an application to strike out a statement of case. The judge allowed an appeal where a…
COST BITES 83: DEFENDANT SERVING BUDGET LATE SCRAPES HOME IN A “BORDERLINE” CASE
In K/S Mountain Invest v Ducat Maritime Ltd [2023] EWHC 939 (Comm) HHJ Keyser KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) granted the defendant relief from sanctions following the late filing of its costs budget. The defendant was, perhaps, fortunate….
FAILURE TO PAY CORRECT COURT FEE WHEN LODGING PROCEEDINGS AT COURT MEANS ACTION BITES THE DUST: CPR 3.9 AND 3.10 CANNOT HELP
In Peterson & Anor v Howard De Walden Estates Ltd [2023] EWHC 929 (KB) the unfortunate claimant failed to fail the correct fee. The court declined to issue proceedings. Consequently the claim was out of time Mr Justice Eyre held…
ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE TO BRIGHTEN UP YOUR DAY: SERVICE AT THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS: CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL IN HIS ARGUMENTS ABOUT KNOWLEDGE
There are a number of issues relating to service of the claim form in the judgment of Peter MacDonald Eggers KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Boettcher v (Xio (UK) LLP & Ors [2023] EWHC 801 (Comm). Here…
COST BITES 79: JUDGE AWARDS GUIDELINE RATES EVEN IN HEAVY COMMERCIAL CASE
In Manek & Ors v 360 One WAM Ltd & Ors (Re Consequentials) [2023] EWHC 985 (Comm) Simon Rainey KC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) declined to award rates that were higher than the Guideline Rates in…
SECTION 33 APPLICATION ALLOWED IN ACTION ISSUED 4 YEARS AFTER LIMITATION EXPIRED
In Tyers v Aegis Defence Services (BVI) Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 896 (KB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer allowed an application under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 in a case where the proceedings were issued 7 years after…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: WEBINAR 25th APRIL 2023
This blog spends a lot of time looking at cases where things have gone wrong, for one reason and another. This webinar on the 25th April 2023 looks at the main problem areas in litigation and the practical steps that…
COST BITES 74: CLAIMANTS HAVE TO PAY THE COSTS OF DISCONTINUED APPLICATION FOR A GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: COUNTING THE COPPERS
In Beck & Ors v Police Federation of England and Wales (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 685 (KB) Senior Master Fontaine held that the claimants should pay the costs of an – abandoned – application for a Group Litigation Order. “I…
ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE – BUT WITH A DIFFERENCE: ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE CLAIM FORM CONTAINED NO FACTS AT ALL
In Free Leisure Ltd (t/a “Cirque Le Soir”) v Peidl And Company Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 792 (Comm) Charles Hollander KC, sitting as a High Court judge considered the appropriate course when the “facts” section of the claim form…
PARTS OF THE EXPERT’S REPORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RED FLAG TO LAWYERS: JUDGE CONSIDERS WHETHER THE PARTIES HAD INSTRUCTED THE CORRECT EXPERT
In M v F & Anor [2022] EWFC 186 Recorder Reed set out the importance of an expert knowing, and complying with, the rules relating to the presentation of expert evidence. The judgment also emphasises the importance of the lawyers…
COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO CLAIMANTS TO CHANGE EXPERTS: BUT WITH CONDITIONS
The principles relating to the court granting permission to a party to change expert were considered in detail by Mrs Justice O’Farrell in Avantage (Cheshire) Ltd & Ors v GB Building Solutions Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 802 (TCC). The…
You must be logged in to post a comment.