THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 56: SHOULD THE COURT STRIKE OUT THE ACTION WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAS PLEADED FALSE FACTS IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM ?
We are continuing to look at an unusual case in relation to pleadings. The claimant had pleaded false matters in the Particulars of Claim and admitted their falsity. The defendant applied to strike out the entire action. This judgment looks…
MORE DECISIONS ABOUT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND “HALLUCINATED” CASES: THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IS FAR FROM HAPPY: LEGAL PROFESSIONALS WHO DELEGATE THEIR WORK REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING ITS ACCURACY
As I’ve said before the hallucinated cases just keep on coming. The issues were considered by the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) here. There are important points about the need to supervise staff who undertake legal research. It is…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 55: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM CONTAINED A (SIGNIFICANTLY) FALSE FACT: JUDGE FINDS THAT THIS WAS PRINCIPALLY DUE TO THE FAULT OF “BARRISTER M”
It is rare for a judgment about pleadings to be “gripping” reading. We have such a case here. From the opening lines, to the detailed consideration of how the pleadings went wrong, the narrative is compelling. We even have an…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: “STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR: SHARING THE PAIN” (FEBRUARY 2020) (WITH LINKS TO THE WHOLE SERIES)
In this series I always try to look at posts that remain relevant today. This post, indeed the series it was in from 2019 – 2020, clearly remain topical. The Law Society Gazette last week reported that a record number…
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…
THE USE OF AI FOR PREPARING COURT DOCUMENTS: READ THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL INTERIM REPORT AND CONSULTATION
The Civil Justice Council has produced an interim report and consultation document on the use of AI for preparing Court documents. This is worthwhile reading. It summarises many of the current issues “Artificial intelligence (“AI”) has enormous potential to be…
CASE FAILED BECAUSE CLAIMANTS’ SOLICITORS ATTEMPTED TO ISSUE USING THE WRONG METHOD: THE DANGERS OF LEAVING THINGS TO THE LAST MINUTE
There are always profound dangers in leaving the issue of proceedings to the last minute. This case illustrates that danger. The claimants left it to days before the expiry of the limitation period before applying to issue. They used the…
COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWS APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT: THE APPELLANTS HAD NEVER BREACHED A PEREMPTORY ORDER: HOW “UNLESS ORDERS” SHOULD BE CONSTRUED
For the second time this month we are looking at a successful appeal against the construction of an “unless” order. In both cases the judges below had found that the appellants had breached the order. In both cases that finding…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: EXPERT EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS (ALLOWED IN PART): ADVOCACY AND ARGUMENT – HAD TO GO
We are looking at a case where the sole issue the court was considering was the question of whether passages in the witness statements provided by the claimant were admissible. Unusually the Competition Appeal Tribunal allowed parts of the statements…
EXPERT WATCH 36: THE JUDGE FINDS THAT EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “LITERALLY UNBELIEVABLE” (AND IT GETS WORSE…) “I MEAN, IT IS DISHONEST, FULL STOP”
We are used to seeing judicial criticism of experts on this site. We have an example here of a claimant’s case coming to grief because the judge did not accept her evidence or the evidence of the two experts called…
PART 36: RECENT CASES, KEY ISSUES AND KEY PROBLEMS CONSIDERED: WEBINAR 26th FEBRUARY 2026
A detailed working knowledge of Part 36 in practice is no longer optional for litigators. Recent decisions show the courts applying the rules with increasing rigour, exposing parties to serious and often unexpected costs consequences. This webinar cuts through…
SERVICE POINTS 27 : EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE CLAIM FORM SET ASIDE: FAILURES IN THE DUTY TO GIVE FULL DISCLOSURE PLAY A MAJOR PART
We have got to the middle of February and this is (I think) the first case about failures of service of the claim form this year. This case has a history we have seen a lot on this site. The…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION (2): CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE NICE PEOPLE OF TWITTER:
I am here summarising the Advice given by lawyers on the social media site formerly known as Twitter. In April 2019 I asked lawyers what their advice would be for their colleagues in the profession when things go wrong. Specifically…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DATE OF RECEIPT AT COURT FOR LIMITATION PURPOSES AND DATE OF ISSUE FOR THE PURPOSES OF SERVICE: AVOID TESTING THIS DISTINCTION IF YOU CAN
Here we look at an issue that can cause confusion, it is important from the point of view of determining the date from which the date of service runs. The relevant date for limitation purposes is the date of receipt…
COST BITES 348 : A PARTY SEEKING SECURITY FOR COSTS SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED TIME SPENT IN SETTLEMENT AND ADR
There is an interesting comment at the end of the judgment. The judge made an order for security for costs. However he also expressed concern that the defendant’s estimated costs did not include anything in relation to the costs of…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: “EXPERTS: THE JOINT REPORT AND THOSE TROUBLESOME “AGENDAS”: FEBRUARY 2018
There have been several major issues about the way in which the joint meetings of experts are conducted. This includes the problems that occur when the parties cannot even agree on an agenda for the meeting. This post looked at…
MEMBER NEWS: A REMINDER OF MEMBER BENEFITS AND WHERE TO FIND THE DISCOUNT CODES: ESSENTIAL TOPICS COVERED IN WEBINARS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR
A reminder that member subscribers have access to discounts on webinars being presented throughout the year. The details of the webinars, the discounts and how to find the discount codes are below. The first webinar sets out the practical consequences…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 54: ALTHOUGH THE PARTICULARS WOULD NOT BE STRUCK OUT SOME WORDS NEED TO BE CHANGED: CHOOSE YOUR WORDS WITH CARE…
We are returning to look at the case where the Master refused to strike out pleadings on the grounds that they were an abuse of process. However it was also made clear that the use of certain words in the…
PROVING THINGS 278: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE THEIR CASE WHILST THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO PROVE FRAUD: MULTIPLE INCONSISTENCIES LEAD TO EVIDENCE NOT BEING ACCEPTED
Here we look at a judgment where the claimant failed to establish his case. The defendant also failed to prove that the claimant was involved in a “staged crash”. It shows how cumulative inconsistencies in a party’s evidence can lead…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS OF LIMITATION AND MAKING SECTION 33 APPLICATIONS: WEBINAR 20th FEBRUARY 2026 (MAKE SURE YOU’RE ON TIME…)
We have seen a few interesting cases about limitation in the past 12 months. Misunderstanding, and missing, limitation periods remains a frequent issue in modern litigation. This webinar deals with common issues and problems that arise with limitation in practice….
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE DRAFTING OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: “IT IS DIFFICULT TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN WHAT F SAYS AND WHAT AN ALGORITHM TELLS F TO SAY”
There is much material about witness evidence and witness statements on this site. In recent years we have also been discussing the use (and misuse) of artificial intelligence. We can be fairly sure that there will be much more about…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION(1): A PRIMER FOR “WHEN THE SKY IS FALLING”
Very little (if any) of the legal curriculum is devoted to what to do when things go wrong. Not enough (in my view) is devoted to preventing things go wrong. However here we concentrate on what do when something goes…
ANOTHER ISSUE ABOUT UNLESS ORDERS: CAN A COURT MAKE AN ORDER SPECIFYING A SUM FOR DAMAGES IF THE DEFENDANT DOES NOT COMPLY?
There have been a number of cases about unless orders recently. This one looks at the issue of whether the court can make an order and state that, if there is default, the claimant can enter judgment for a specific…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN YOU MUST AND WHEN YOU CAN’T SERVE THE CLAIM FORM ON A SOLICITOR: TRY TO AVOID TELLING THE COURT YOU ARE “SURPRISED” BY THE RULES…
The issue of when a claim form can be served on a defendant’s solicitor is one that has been considered many times on this site over the years. There can be two fatal errors for claimants. (1) Serving on a…
COST BITES 345: RECEIVING PARTY’S FAILURE TO FILE ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT RENDERS THE ASSESSMENT A NULLITY: CLEVER AND COMPLEX ARGUMENTS DID NOT PREVAIL
What are the consequences if a party lodging the documents for a provisional assessment of costs fails to file all the relevant documents and the assessment goes ahead without the judge seeing all the points of dispute? . This is…
THE PROFOUND DIFFICULTIES IN AMENDING PROCEEDINGS TO SUBSTITUTE A PARTY AFTER THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAS EXPIRED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: WHY CLAIMANTS HAVE TO BE CERTAIN OF WHO THEY ARE SUING…
This decision today emphasises the difficulties for a claimant who has waited until near the end of the limitation period, issued and then finds that they have not sued the correct defendant. It is now less likely that a court…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: MAKING SURE YOU ARE “LEGALLY STREETWISE”: “CLIENT’S MAY SEEK TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF YOU” (FEBRUARY 2016)
This post started in an unusual way. It was originally an online post from a firm of solicitors (Darlingtons) and I obtained their permission to set out the key points. Unfortunately Darlingtons are no longer trading and the full post…
WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS A SOLICITOR’S FIRM AND THE PROGRESS OF THE CLAIM “HINDERED BY A SERIES OF PROCEDURAL BREACHES”: NOT A GREAT START TO THE CASE
It is a poor start to a solicitor’s application for judicial review of the Legal Ombudsman when the firm itself has failed to comply with rules and directions. We have such a case here. The claimant firm applied for judicial…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026
As regular readers of this site know procedural mistakes derail more civil claims than weak evidence or bad law. Missed deadlines, defective pleadings, non-compliance with court directions and costs failures can all result in serious sanctions — or the claim…
THE CLAIMANTS FILED A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: COURT REFUSES AN EXTENSION: SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE: OUT OF TIME MEANS OUT OF COURT…
One thing anyone considering an appeal should know, with absolute certainty, is the date the appeal has to be lodged. This, in turn, involves knowing the date on which the period starts running. Here we see a case where the…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED : WHEN NON-COMPLIANCE ALMOST APPEARS TO BE A LITIGATION STRATEGY: HAVING A BONA FIDE CLAIM DOES NOT GIVE YOU A FREE PASS
Here we have a case where the Court of Appeal considered the Denton principles in some detail. The judgment provides a useful reminder of some basic principles. Firstly that a litigant seeking relief from sanctions cannot complain about the original…
HIGH COURT TACKLES SOME DIFFICULT PROCEDURAL ISSUES (1): IS A PREVIOUS BREACH NECESSARY FOR A PEREMPTORY ORDER TO BE MADE
We are looking at judgment that is, essentially, all about procedural compliance and the court’s approach to making “unless orders”. The approach of the appellate court to case management decisions could be added to that list. It is a detailed…
PART 36: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES: DETAILS OF THE WEBINAR ON THE 26th FEBRUARY 2025
A working — indeed, a detailed — knowledge of how Part 36 operates in practice is essential for all litigators. Although it is famously described as a “self-contained code”, it is a code whose application continues to develop, often in…
HIGH COURT SETS ASIDE AN ORDER MADE FOLLOWING AN APPLICATION WITHOUT NOTICE : THIS IS A REHEARING IN FULL – THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE TO SHOW AN ERROR SUCH AS TO WARRANT SETTING ASIDE THE ORIGINAL ORDER
Here we look at a case where the court set aside an order made without notice. The Master found that the evidence presented to him at the initial hearing was “neither full nor frank”. It is a reminder of the…
MAKING THREATS TO REPORT LAWYERS TO THEIR REGULATORY BODIES IS CAPABLE OF AMOUNTING TO CONTEMPT OF COURT: MAKE THREATS AT YOUR OWN PERIL…
We are looking at a case where a respondent to committal proceedings threatened to make regulatory and other complaints about the conduct of the claimant solicitors. The judge held that such threats made in these circumstances are capable of amounting…
EXPERT WATCH 33: WHEN AN AN EXPERT RELIES ON THE FINDINGS OF A PREVIOUS EXPERT: THIS CAN LEAD TO DIFFICULTIES…
I am grateful to Jim Shepphard solicitor for sending me a copy of this report part of which relates to to the assessment of expert evidence. The claimant’s expert had a problem because their report was based, in part, on…
YOU HAVE TO PAY THE FULL COURT FEE: THE FACT THAT A COURT HAS ACCEPTED A FEE DOES NOT RENDER IT “FUNCTUS OFFICIO”
Here we have an ingenious argument that a court could not claim a higher court fee. It was an ingenious argument that failed. This shows the importance of claimants knowing the value of a case when they issued, and the…
A FURTHER EXAMPLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE GENERATING PHANTOM REFERENCES AND FALSE QUOTATIONS
We see the another example of the dangers of the use of Artificial Intelligence in this case. Two authorities relied upon by a respondent did not contain the words attributed to them, none of them supported the propositions that had…
THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH WAS NOT SIGNED BY AN AUTHORISED PERSON: IT REQUIRES “FACTS” NOT INFORMATION: A SOLICITOR EMPLOYEE SHOULD NOT HAVE SIGNED IN THE NAME OF THE FIRM
Here we have an example of a Statement of Truth that was non-compliant it contained the wrong wording and was signed by the wrong person in the wrong way. It shows the need to ensure that the rules in relation…
MAZUR MATTERS 48: THE INTERIM REPORT: REGULATOR’S GUIDANCE ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION WAS “NOT ALWAYS ARTICULATED WITH SUFFICIENT PRECISION”
The snappily titled “Interim Report: Regulatory review of advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies” from the Legal Services Board is five pages long (including one page spent on…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: ADEQUATE TIME ESTIMATES (JANUARY 2020): 30 MINUTES WAS NOT REALLY LONG ENOUGH: REVISITING THE PREVIOUS POSTS
The issue of time estimates has been a regular source of posts for this site. This provides an opportunity to look at the judge’s observations that the original time estimate of 30 minutes before the District Judge was inadequate. We…
PART 36 IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS: WHAT PRACTITIONERS NEED TO KNOW: WEBINAR 26th FEBRUARY 2.00 pm (THREE TRACTORS, TWO FIELDS AND FAILING TO BEAT AN OFFER BY A “WHISKER”)
The past 12 months have seen some important cases about Part 36. Every civil litigator needs to keep up to date with these developments. This webinar looks at the cases and considers the practical implications for litigators. DATE AND TIME…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026: REMEMBER WE LOOK AT THESE PROBLEMS TO TRY TO MAKE SURE YOU DON’T HAVE THEM
The next webinar in the “Avoiding the Pitfalls” series is a 90 minute long webinar on the 6th February 2026. The webinar examines the most common procedural problems and practical difficulties that arise in civil litigation. It explores where and…
BEWARE OF FALSE (OR AT LEAST MISLEADING) DOCUMENTS WITH “COURT SEALS”: “CLUMSY ATTEMPTS WHICH COULD MISLEAD MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC…”
We have seen a few occasions where someone has produced an “official” court document which turned out to be no such thing. We see another example here, a “warrant” that, on the face of it had a red circular seal…
ONE OF THE PERILS OF OBTAINING AN INJUNCTION: AN INTERVENER GIVEN LIBERTY TO APPLY TO BRING A POTENTIAL CLAIM FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY AN INJUNCTION: LITIGATORS MUST GIVE CAREFUL ADVICE…
A party seeking an injunction is usually required to give an undertaking as to damages. That undertaking normally extends to the defendants/respondents to the injunction. However the terms of the injunction often give third parties affected by the injunction a…
SHOULD A LOSING PARTY FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER? A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A HIGH HURDLE WITH A “FORMIDABLE BURDEN”
A litigant who fails to beat a Part 36 offer can normally expect to face the consequences set out in the rules. There is an exception if that litigant can satisfy the court that it is “unjust” for those consequences…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A DENIAL: IF YOU DENY – YOU HAVE TO SAY WHY…
Some defences adopt a scattergun approach of “denying” everything. Some are more selective – they “put the Claimant to strict proof”. Many defences ignore the important distinction between a non-admission and a denial. It is important that practitioners know the…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON’T COMPLY WITH THE RULES: 10 REASONS WHY GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT (FROM JANUARY 2018)
Today we go back to a post from January 2018 on a point that remains just as relevant today. There is a mandatory requirement that a witness give the source of their information and belief. A surprising number of witness…
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE
A perennial problem for litigators is the situation where a claimant has a good case but the Defendant is impecunious and uninsured. In many (but not all) motor claims the Motor Insurers Bureau will provide a practical remedy. In all…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: DO NOT MENTION A PART 36 OFFER TO THE TRIAL JUDGE BEFORE THE TRIAL(OR DURING IT FOR THAT MATTER…)
The first time I wrote on this topic many practitioners expressed surprise that I had written something so very “basic”. Some readers were incredulous. However, as we see below, others shared their experiences. This rule is not known, or not…
You must be logged in to post a comment.