COST BITES 14: TIME FOR PAYMENT OF COURT AWARD THERE SHOULD BE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ANY APPLICATION FOR FURTHER TIME
We are returning to the judgment in Vitol SA v Genser Energy Ghana Ltd [2022] EWHC 1955 (Comm) Ms Lesley Anderson QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge). It is quite common for a party ordered to pay costs to…
PROVING THINGS 234: PROVIDE AN EXPLANATION FOR DELAY BY EVIDENCE – NOT BY SUBMISSIONS
The judgment of Mr Justice Henshaw in Hays & Ors v Bloomfield Investments LLC [2022] EWHC 1648 (Comm) was on a very specific area of procedure. However there is one matter of more general interest. The need to have evidence…
THE ESTATE OF A DECEASED PERSON CAN BE SUBSTITUTED AS A PARTY WHEN THERE IS A PROVISIONAL DAMAGES ORDER: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Power v Bernard Hastie & Company Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1927 (QB) Mr Justice Johnson held that the estate of a claimant who had obtained a provisional damages order can take advantage of that order. The order was…
COST BITES 8: CENTRAL LONDON HOURLY RATES: THE RATE DEPENDS ON THE LITIGATION NOT THE LITIGATOR
In Brake & Anor v Guy & Ors [2022] EWHC 1911 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge). Considered the appropriate hourly rate to be applied on an application. Although costs were being assessed on an indemnity…
COURT OF APPEAL REJECTS INGENIOUS ARGUMENT THAT PERMISSION GROUNDS SHOULD BE RE-OPENED – AFTER THE APPEAL
I have written more about applications for permission to appeal in the past few weeks than in the previous nine years. The Court of Appeal judgment in Ingenious Games LLP & Ors v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs…
SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: HAVE COGENT EVIDENCE (AND A DRAFT DEFENCE) TO HAND: DEFENDANT’S DELAY ALONE WOULD HAVE LED TO APPLICATION BEING REFUSED IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE
I am grateful to Barrister Leslie Keegan for their note of the judgment of Master Cook in Buckingham -v- Elneil (15th July 2022)*. The Master refused the defendant’s application to set aside a default judgment. The defendant did not have…
CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER WHICH INVOLVED A 1.15% DISCOUNT WAS A GENUINE ONE:EVEN A NARROW MARGIN MEANS DEFENDANTS FACE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES
In Omya UK Ltd v Andrews Excavations Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 1882 (TCC) Mr Roger Ter Haar QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, found that a claimant’s offer that was some 1.15% less than the sum awarded…
APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: THE RULES WERE NOT FOLLOWED AND THE REPORT WAS “FAR BELOW THE STANDARD OF ANALYSIS THAT THIS COURT IS ENTITLED TO EXPECT FROM AN EXPERT WITNESS”
In North Yorkshire Clinical Commissioning Group v E (Covid Vaccination) (Rev1) [2022] EWCOP 15 Mr Justice Poole disallowed an application by a respondent in relation to expert evidence. The expert had been instructed without compliance with the procedural rules in…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 93: THE TIME FOR SERVING AN APPLICATION AFTER IT HAS BEEN MADE
The previous post about the judgment in AMRA Leasing Ltd v DAC Aviation (EA) Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1718 (Comm) involved a case where the defendants had waited for two months to serve an application. This was not a critical…
DELAY IN APPLYING TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: FAILURE TO BE PROMPT IS A HIGHLY RELEVANT FACTOR
In AMRA Leasing Ltd v DAC Aviation (EA) Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1718 (Comm) Mr Justice Jacobs refused the defendants’ application to set aside a default judgment. The defendants’ delay in making the application, and then a further delay…
COST BITES 7: INDEMNITY COSTS WHEN A CLAIMANT HAS TRIED TO HAVE A SECOND BITE OF THE LITIGATION CHERRY
In Tinkler v Esken Ltd (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1802 (Ch) Mr Justice Leech ordered indemnity costs against a claimant who, in essence, attempted to relitigate a case he had lost on previously. “A principal difference between an order for…
CLAIMANT LIED ABOUT “JOB OFFER”: FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST AND LOSES £130,000
I am grateful to Aled Morris from Horwich Farrelly for sending me a transcript of the judgment of HHJ Murdock in Hawkins -v- Holmes (County Court at Leicester, 1st April 2022). It is a case where the court found the…
TOO MANY CLAIMANTS SPOIL THE CLAIM FORM: THREE STRIKES … AND YOU’RE OUT
NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED BY THE DIVISIONAL COURT. SEE THE LATER POST ON THE DECISION HERE. In Abbott & 3,499 Ors v Ministry of Defence [2022] EWHC 1807 (QB) Master Davison rejected the claimant’s arguments that it was permissible…
WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WERE SERVED ONE DAY LATE
There were complicated factors involved in the judgment of Deputy Master Marsh in Croke & Anor v National Westminster Bank Plc & Ors [2022] EWHC 1367 (Ch), however the action failed because the claimant was one day late in serving…
THE COURT CANNOT EXTEND TIME FOR ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION
A defendant is entitled to make an early Part 36 offer. This, undoubtedly causes difficulties for many claimants. The rules relating to late acceptance are fairly unsympathetic. Nor is it possible to for a claimant to make a prospective application…
A DEFENDANT WHO DOES NOT ATTEND TRIAL CANNOT SIMPLY TURN THE CLOCK BACK: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES APPLICATION UNDER CPR 39.3
In Mabrouk v Murray [2022] EWCA Civ 960 the Court of Appeal refused the defendant’s application for permission to appeal in a case where the defendant failed to attend the trial. The Court of Appeal dismissed the application under CPR…
A COURT ORDER IS A SERIOUS, NOT TRIVIAL, MATTER: A PARTY IN BREACH CANNOT ACT AS IF THE ORDER HAD NEVER BEEN MADE: “THAT SHIP HAS SAILED”.
One of the most imprudent things to do in litigation is to let a court order be made, not comply and then respond by arguing that the order should never have been made anyway. We see an example of this…
DEFENDANTS DEBARRED FROM DEFENDING A CLAIM CANNOT PARTICIPATE IN THE TRIAL: “DEBARRING ORDERS SHOULD MEAN WHAT THEY SAY”
In Financial Conduct Authority v London Property Investments & Ors [2022] EWHC 1041 (Ch) Mr Justice Trower considered whether a defendant, debarred from participating in proceedings, could play any part in the trial of those proceedings. It also highlights…
RESPONDENTS TO AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: YOU SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY WRITTEN A LETTER AND SAVED YOURSELVES £67,000
In over three decades of writing about civil procedure I cannot recall any cases about costs following a permission to appeal hearing. There are now two cases this week. In Kerseviciene v Quadri & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1757 (QB)…
COST BITES 5: COSTS IN THE CASE APPROPRIATE ONCE A CLAIMANT HAD DISCLOSED DOCUMENTS IN RELATION TO SECURITY FOR COSTS
In Chiswick International Holdings Ltd v Oakvest Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 799 (Comm) HHJ Pelling QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered the appropriate order for costs when a party had offered security in an application for security…
COURT EXTENDS TIME TO BRING HUMAN RIGHTS ACT CLAIM: MINOR CLAIMANTS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR
In CJ & Ors Wiltshire Police [2022] EWHC 1661 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer extended the limitation period in a claim under the Human Rights Act. Although the claimants were ultimately unsuccessful there are important observations in relation to the…
WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHO DID NOT ENSURE THAT THEY HAD APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY TO ACT ON BEHALF OF A COMPANY
In Rushbrooke UK Ltd v 4 Designs Concept Ltd [2022] EWHC 1687 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) made a wasted costs order against a firm of solicitors who had acted for a limited company without…
DIRE ISSUES ARISE WHEN AN EXPERT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS IN RELATION TO THE JOINT MEETING: FULL TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE
I have written before about the decision of Senior Master Fontaine in Andrews & Ors v Kronospan Ltd [2022] EWHC 479 (QB) where the claimants permission to rely on an expert witness was withdrawn because of conduct in relation to…
HOURLY RATES AGREED WITH LITIGATION FRIEND ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW: THE APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE WHEN A SHORTFALL IN RECOVERABLE COSTS IS SOUGHT FROM A CLAIMANT
In EVX v Smith [2022] EWHC 1607 (SCCO) Costs Judge Brown held that the hourly rates charged by a solicitor to their own client are subject to review when the court is considering the amount that the claimant should pay…
COSTS INCURRED PRIOR TO DEFENDANT’S BREACH ARE RECOVERABLE: THEY WERE “INCIDENTAL” TO THE APPLICATION
In Gee, Re The Estate of [2022] EWHC 1590 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered an argument that costs incurred by the claimant in an attempt to prevent the breach of a court order, and…
VERY LATE APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSIONS REFUSED: ADMISSIONS MADE IN REPLY REMAINED BINDING
I am grateful to John De Waal QC for pointing out the procedural aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Edwin Johnson in Valley View Health Centre (a firm) & Ors v NHS Property Services Ltd [2022] EWHC 1393 (Ch)….
THE RULES ABOUT WITNESS STATEMENTS “SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A WEAPON FOR THE PURPOSE OF BATTERING THE OPPOSITION”: COMMONSENSE MUST BE USED: APPLICANT ORDERED TO PAY 75% OF THE RESPONDENTS’ COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS
In Curtiss & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1514 (TCC) HHJ Keyser QC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) ordered the applicant to pay 75% the respondents’ costs on the indemnity basis. The…
INDEMNITY COSTS NOT AWARDED WHEN A DEFENDANT REFUSED TO MEDIATE: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Richards & Anor v Speechly Bircham Llp & Anor (Consequential Matters) [2022] EWHC 1512 (Comm) HHJ Russen (sitting as a High Court judge) refused an application for indemnity costs made on the basis that the defendants had refused mediation….
INTERIM PAYMENTS AND THE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD: CLAIMANT OBTAINS PAYMENT DESPITE DEFENDANT’S CONCERNS
In Salwin v Shahed [2022] EWHC 1440 (QB) HHJ Pearce considered the appropriate sum to be paid to the claimant by way of interim payment. This case shows a very careful consideration of the “Eeles” criteria and the factors the…
COURT REFUSES RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN PARTICULARS OF CLAIM ARE SERVED OUT OF TIME: THE DANGERS OF LIVING IN THE “TWILIGHT ZONE” (AND OF LEAVING SERVICE UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE)
In Croke & Anor v National Westminster Bank Plc & Ors [2022] EWHC 1367 (Ch) Deputy Master Marsh refused the claimants’ application for relief from sanctions in a case where the Particulars of Claim were served one day late. It…
DEFENDANT UNSUCCESSFUL IN SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: NO REASONABLE PROSPECT OF SUCCESS: DELAY WOULD HAVE LED TO APPLICATION BEING REFUSED IN ANY EVENT
In Al Nasser & Al Masri Trading Company WLL Ltd Co v Munir [2022] EWHC 1174 (QB) Master Sullivan refused an application to set aside a default judgment. This case shows the importance of having detailed evidence available if a…
MAKING AN APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE, AFTER THE ACTION IS STARTED: THE CLAIMANTS HAVE FIVE PROBLEMS
The judgment of Senior Master Fontaine in Hart & Ors v Royal Borough of Kensington And Chelsea & Ors [2022] EWHC 1090 (QB) highlights the need for applications for disclosure to be made with some considerable focus. The court cannot…
DEFENDANTS WERE TOO LATE TO ACCEPT A PART 36 OFFER: THEIR APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALSO DENIED
In Wirex Ltd v Cryptocarbon Global Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1161 (IPEC) HHJ Hacon determined some interesting issues in relation to attempts to accept Part 36 offers late and relief from sanctions. THE CASE The claimants had obtained a…
ANOTHER CASE WHERE JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS WERE ISSUED IN LONDON BUT IT WAS TRANSFERRED TO LEEDS
In Fajr Ellis, R (On the Application Of) v Student Loans Company [2022] EWHC 1263 (Admin) Mr Justice Fordham held that judicial review proceedings, issued in London, should be transferred to the administrative court in Leeds. “In my judgment…
THE COURT DOESN’T LIKE MACHISMO, AGGRESSIVE LETTERS AND THE LIKE: HOWEVER A CLAIMANT STILL HAS TO GET ON WITH THINGS
There are some interesting observations about the conduct of litigation in the Court of Appeal judgment in Planon Ltd v Gilligan [2022] EWCA Civ 642. The court made it clear that it is alive to “machismo” methods of conducting litigation….
THE BURDEN IS ON THE SERVING PARTY TO SHOW A DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PROPERLY SERVED: SERVICE ON A RESPONDENT RESIDENT IN FRANCE HAD NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED: APPLICATION AGAINST THAT PARTY DISMISSED
In Camberley Group & Ors v Foster & Ors [2022] EWHC 1309 (QB) Richard Hermer QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, dismissed an application for disclosure from a non-party on the grounds that the claimant failed to establish…
THE PRACTICE DIRECTION SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS A WEAPON IN WHICH TO FILLET TWO OR THREE WORDS FROM A WITNESS STATEMENT: CLAIMANTS FAIL IN THEIR PITCH TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE
In Lifestyle Equities CV & Anor v Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1244 (Ch) Mr Justice Mellor refused the claimants’ application to exclude or edit the defendants’ witness statements. “… in my view PD57AC…
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES LEADS TO PARTS OF A CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT BEING STRUCK OUT: COMPLY WITH THE RULES – OR ELSE
In Primavera Associates Ltd v Hertsmere Borough Council [2022] EWHC 1240 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews, sitting as a judge of the High Court, struck out parts of the claimant’s witness statement due to its failure to comply with the rules. …
IS THE CCMCC BREAKING THE LAW ?THE DAMAGES PILOT AND CASES WHERE THE CCMC ARE REFUSING TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS: WHAT IS THE RELEVANT DATE FOR LIMITATION PURPOSES?
I have come across several examples recently of the CCMCC refusing to issue claim forms on the basis that proceedings should have been issued online using the Damages Claim Pilot. In every case the papers have been returned wrongfully, the…
JUDGE REFUSES TO STRIKE OUT ACTION ON THE BASIS OF “ILLEGALITY”: THE CLAIMANT WAS NOT CAPABLE OF COMMITTING “CRIMINAL” ACTS
For the second time today I am writing about a case where the court has refused to strike out a statement of case. In Lewis-Ranwell v G4S Health Services (UK) Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1213 (QB) Mr Justice Garnham…
THE THIRD PARTY (RIGHTS AGAINST INSURERS) ACT 2010 AND THE DATE OF “ACTIONABLE DAMAGE”: COURT REFUSES TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIMANT’S CASE
In the judgment today in Brooks v Zurich Insurance Public Ltd Co & Anor [2022] EWHC 1170 (QB) Master Davison refused an application to strike out an action against insurers under the provisions of the Third Party (Rights Against Insurers)…
WITNESS STATEMENTS WHEN THE WITNESS CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH: “IT IS DOUBTFUL THAT HE IN FACT SIGNED THE STATEMENT”
In Borra v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs & Anor [2022] EWHC 1195 (Ch) ICC Judge Mullen considered the requirements of the Practice Direction in relation to a witness giving evidence in a foreign language. None of the…
A TRIAL BUT NOT BY JURY: DEFENDANT’ APPLICATION FOR DEFAMATION TO BE DETERMINED BY JURY REFUSED
In Blake & Ors v Fox (Re Trial by Jury) [2022] EWHC 1124 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin refused the defendant’s application for a jury trial of a defamation action. “… since the removal of the statutory presumption in s.69(1), jury…
COURT REFUSES RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION IN RELATION TO SERVICE OF INJUNCTION: THERE WAS NO GOOD REASON AND A PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED
We are now looking at the second aspect of the judgment of Mr Justice Nicklin in MBR Acres td & Ors v Maher & Anor [2022] EWHC 1123 (QB). This the claimants’ unsuccessful application for an order that there be…
AN INJUNCTION MUST BE SERVED PERSONALLY: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS DO NOT GET OFF THE STARTING LINE
In MBR Acres td & Ors v Maher & Anor [2022] EWHC 1123 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin held that the obligation to serve an injunction personally had not been altered by the new CPR Part 81. Sending copies of the…
INFERENCES TO BE DRAWN WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT FILE EVIDENCE AND THERE ARE ISSUES WITH DISCLOSURE: A WORKING EXAMPLE
In Sinha v Taylor & Ors [2022] EWHC 1096 (Comm) Mr Simon Colton QC considered the inferences to be drawn when the defendants had not filed witness evidence and there was issues in relation to disclosure. THE CASE The…
“IT WAS UNNECESSARY FOR MATTERS TO BE DEALT WITH SO EXPENSIVELY”: ANOTHER COMMENT ON LACK OF FOCUS IN THE COMMERCIAL COURT
For the second time today I am writing about judicial comments on profligacy in the Commercial Court. This time Mr Justice Andrew Baker in Invest Bank PSC v El-Husseini & Ors [2022] EWHC 894 (Comm). “Even in the context…
WHY A SHORT WITNESS STATEMENT CAN BE MORE COSTLY THAN A LONG ONE? CONDUCT, COSTS, PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT: AN (UNSUCCESSFUL) APPLICATION TO AMEND THAT COULD COST £1 MILLION
In PJSC National Bank Trust & Anor v Mints & Ors [2022] EWHC 1132 (Comm) Mr Justice Foxton considered issues relating to payment of costs after the claimants had been unsuccessful in an application to amend the Particulars of Claim. …
DENTON PRINCIPLES DO NOT APPLY TO AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: NO UNIVERSAL JUDICIAL VIEW HERE
There is a brief report on Lawtel of the case of C-v- D [2022] WLUK 99 where Dexter Dias QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court judge, did not agree with the proposition that Denton principles applied to an application…
PART 36 BENEFITS PAID TO A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT: THE ISSUES CONSIDERED: IT WAS NOT UNJUST FOR THE USUAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY
We are returning to the judgment in Ashford Borough Council & Anor v Wilson [2022] EWHC 988 (QB) Darryl Allen QC, sitting as a High Court judge. The earlier post looked at the issue of whether the defendant was bound by…
You must be logged in to post a comment.