
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ISSUES: CLAIMANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS: HIGH COURT UPHOLDS THE EXTENSIONS OF TIME
The judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Graham v Fidelidade – Companhia De Seguros SA [2024] EWHC 2010 (KB) contains some salutary lessons for litigators. In particular the importance of complying the the rules for applying for extensions of time…

CAN A COURT STRIKE OUT A CASE ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE CLAIMANT HAS NO REAL INTENTION OF PROCEEDING TO TRIAL? IT CAN – BUT NOT IN THIS CASE
In Lloyd v Hayward & Anor [2024] EWHC 2033 (Ch) HHJ Keyser KC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) considered the question of whether the delay in the progress of an action should lead to it being struck…

HARASSMENT PROCEEDINGS: PART 7 OR PART 8 ? FACTUAL DISPUTES MILITATE TRANSFER TO PART 7
We have seen several cases on this blog where the courts have considered the issues caused by the rules requiring that claims for harassment must be issued under Part 8 (however note that there is an important exception, considered in Pattinson…

OMNIBUS CLAIM FORMS: COURT MANAGEMENT OF CASES AND “DISAGGREGATION”
A problem with “omnibus” claim forms and subsequent case management was considered in detail in the judgment of Mr Justice Garnham and Master Davison in Adams & Ors v Ministry of Defence [2024] EWHC 1966 (KB). The judgment considered the…

HARASSMENT PROCEEDINGS: PART 7 AND NOT PART 8 SHOULD HAVE BEEN USED
There are often procedural difficulties when a claimant bringing a claim for harassment has to use the Part 8 procedure (as this is prescribed by CPR 65.28(1)(a)). However as the judgment of Aidan Eardley KC in Pattinson v Winsor [2024]…

“WHAT I CANNOT DO IS HEAR AN APPEAL AGAINST A RECITAL”: WORDING OF ORDER MEANS SLIP RULE HAS TO BE APPLIED
It appears to be a well known fact that family lawyers love recitals. (Not the musical kind – but as the preamble to any and all court orders). This issue caused problems in MA v Roux [2024] EWHC 1917 (Fam)…

THE JOINT MEETING OF EXPERTS AND THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT: WEBINAR 29th JULY 2024
I was a more than a little shocked to read the judgment in Glover & Anor v Fluid Structural Engineers & Technical Designers Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1257 it is a case that shows that lawyers are still making…

DEFENDANT DID NOT ATTEND TRIAL: APPLICATION FOR REMOTE HEARING NOT ALLOWED: JUDGMENT ENTERED: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL UNSUCESSFUL
In Sobowale v Lendinvest Capital SARL [2024] EWHC 1829 (Ch) Nicola Rushton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) dismissed a defendant’s appeal against judgment being entered against him when he failed to attend a trial. “There was no…

COST (MEGA) BITES 167: AN EXHAUSTING CASE (IV): “BUT YOURS IS NEARLY AS BIG AS MINE” IS NOT A GOOD ARGUMENT: COSTS BUDGETS COULD NOT BE COMPARED
We are continuing to look at the judgment in relation to the budgets in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB). In this post we are considering the argument that since claimants’ budget was very similar to the defendants’…

APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS JUDGE’S REFUSAL TO RELY ON OWN EXPERT WHEN HE DID NOT AGREE WITH THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT: THE “STAGGERED APPROACH” IS IMPORTANT
In Seneschall v Trisant Foods Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1380 (Ch) Mr Justice Adam Johnson overturned a decision whereby a party was refused permission to rely on their own expert report. The judgment is important because it emphasises the…

WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT BREACH THE PRACTICE DIRECTION: WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH? HIGH COURT DECISION
In Vainker & Anor v Marbank Construction Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 2785 (TCC) Mrs Justice Jefford considered the appropriate approach where a party objected to the contents of witness statements that did not comply with Practice Direction 57AC. She…

IS A PARTY ENTITLED TO SEE THEIR OPPONENT’S CORRESPONDENCE WITH AN EXPERT LEADING UP TO THE JOINT MEETING? AN ISSUE THAT IS IMPORTANT – BUT UNDECIDED
In Frasers Group plc v Saxo Bank AS & Anor [2024] EWHC 188 (Comm) HHJ Pelling KC considered issues relating to whether a party’s correspondence with their expert leading up to the joint meeting of experts should be disclosed. The…

MANCHESTER IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE VENUE FOR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN NORFOLK: THE CASE GOES SOUTH…
In Bartosik, R (On the Application Of) v Office of the Police & Crime Commissioner for Norfolk [2024] EWHC 932 (Admin) Mr Justice Fordham held that the Administrative Court in Manchester is not the appropriate venue for a dispute over…

THE DANGERS OF RUNNING UP TO DEADLINES AND LEAVING MATTERS LATE FOR COMPLIANCE: DEFENDANT HAD FAILED TO FILE WITH COURT ORDERS: REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS UPHELD ON APPEAL
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Jaiyesimi v Kukoyi [2024] EWHC 164 (KB) has many important lessons for litigators. Firstly the need for the fee to be paid in order that an application is properly made. Secondly the dangers…

WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: WEBINAR 30th APRIL 2024
This blog often looks at cases where litigation has gone wrong, be it limitation, service or someone falling foul of the rules or court orders. One of the saddest aspects of many of these cases is that if prompt and…

TRYING TO SQUEEZE A PART 7 CASE INTO A PART 8 APPLICATION: DISPUTES OF FACT MAKE PART 8 UNSUITABLE
In ISG Retail Ltd v FK Construction Ltd [2024] EWHC 878 (TCC) Neil Moody KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered the question of whether a case was suitable for Part 8 determination. He decided that there were…

TOO MANY PARTIES CAN INCUR THE COURT’S WRATH: THE DIFFICULTIES IN PLEADING A CASE WHERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE CLAIMANTS
In Niprose Investments Ltd & Ors v Vincents Solicitors Ltd (Professional negligence) [2024] EWHC 801 (Ch) HHJ Hodge KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered some of the issues where 35 claimants attempted to plead their claim on one…

TRIALS BY JURY IN CIVIL CASES: THE RULES AND CASES CONSIDERED
In Taylor v Savik & Anor [2024] EW Misc 15 (CC) HHJ Paul Matthews considered the question of whether a jury trial should be ordered in a civil trial. The judgment contains a detailed consideration of the legislation and case…

SERVING A SKELETON LATE DOES NOT A HAPPY JUDGE MAKE: IT IS A VICE TO SUPPLY MATERIALS LATE IN THE DAY
In Karimi, R (On the Application Of) v Sheffield City Council [2024] EWHC 93 (Admin) Fordham J sent out a reminder to practitioners (and particularly those who draft skeleton arguments) of the need to file skeleton arguments in accordance with…

PROVING THINGS 236: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENT THAT IT HAD LOST MORE THAN £6 MILLION FAILED TO TRAVEL: CAUSATION NOT ESTABLISHED
The judgment of Simon Tinkler, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, in Ickenham Travel Group Ltd v Tiffin Green Ltd [2024] EWHC 27 (Comm) is another classic example of a failure to prove damages. The defendant had been in…

PROVING THINGS 234: REMOTE EVIDENCE FROM OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION: PARTY CALLING WITNESSES HITS A PROBLEM
The judgment of Deputy District Judge Batstone in Amanda Seafood PTE Ltd v Sykes Seafood Ltd [2023] EW Misc 13 (CC) illustrates the care that needs to be taken when attempting to call a witness who is giving evidence remotely…

COST BITES 110: THE IMPORTANCE OF ATTENDANCE NOTES: COUNSEL’S FEES INCLUDED
In Allseas Group SA, R (On the Application Of) v Sultana [2023] EWHC 2731 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard emphasised the point that records of conferences and important steps in a case are important in relation to the assessment of costs….

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…

NEW COSTS RULES: MEET THE BANDS…
The new costs rules introduce a new concept of the “complexity band”. Here we look at the bands within the intermediate track and the rules relating to helping the court in relation to allocation within those bands. COMPLEXITY BANDS…

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…

WITNESS STATEMENTS, PART 18 QUESTIONS AND CASE MANAGEMENT: THE MASTER WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO DISCLOSE HIS WITNESS EVIDENCE FIRST
It has taken to the third time of writing about the decision in Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB) to get to the detail of what the appeal was actually about. This part of the judgment is important…

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…

PERMISSION GIVEN FOR “UPDATING” WITNESS STATEMENTS: PARTIES NEED TO CONSIDER DIRECTIONS FOR UP-TO-DATE FACTUAL EVIDENCE
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 1770 (KB) is an example of how consideration needs to be given to “updated” witness statements in a case where there situation is…

“E-MAIL EXCHANGES COULD BE 2,000 OR 4,000 PAGES APART”: A JUDGMENT ABOUT BUNDLES (WHERE YOU CAN SEE SOME FAIRLY GRUMPY CORRESPONDENCE)
In Bailey -v- Stonewall Equality Ltd, Garden Court Chambers & others the Employment Tribunal awarded £20,000 costs against the respondents (in what is normally a no- costs regime) because of the chaotic way that the application bundle had been presented. …

3,450 CLAIMANTS CAN USE THE SAME CLAIM FORM: DIVISIONAL COURT DECISION ON CPR 7.3.
I am grateful to David Platt KC for sending me a copy of the decision of the Divisional Court in Abbott -v- Ministry of Defence [2023] EWHC 1475 (KB). The Court overturned a previous decision of a Master and allowed…

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…

THE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS LATE: CLAIMANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: DEFENDANT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: EQUALITY IS NOT ALWAYS EQUITY
It is quite possible that both parties in an action could be in default. One party could be granted relief from sanctions for that default and the other refused. This is precisely what happened in Shill Properties Ltd v Bunch…

COST BITES 60: THE COURT WOULD NOT RETROSPECTIVELY REALLOCATE A CASE TO THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK:
I am grateful to Craig Leigh for sending me copies of two judgments of Recorder David Allen K.C. in the case of Johnson -v- GE Money Secured Loans Ltd. The second judgment in relation to costs contains a decision on…

COST BITES 51: CASE FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE FAST TRACK NOT SMALL CLAIMS TRACK: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL
In Wilkins v Serco Ltd [2023] EWHC 61 (KB) Mrs Justice Heather Williams rejected the defendant’s appeal in relation to allocation of a case for false imprisonment. She upheld a finding that the case would have been allocated to the…

DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO VACATE TRIAL DATE, AND FOR A FOUR YEAR STAY, REFUSED: JUSTICE IS ACHIEVED BY THE TRIAL DATE BEING MET
In Benford (A Child) v East And North Hertfordshire NHS Trust (Rev1) [2022] EWHC 3263 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie refused the defendant’s application for an adjournment of a trial date. The defendant argued that medical uncertainty meant that it was…

WHEN COSTS INCURRED AT A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ARE ORDERED AGAINST THE DEFENDANT: DON’T ALWAYS ASSUME IT WILL BE “COSTS IN THE CASE”
It may be imprudent to assume that arguments that take place at the case management stage will always be subject to an order for costs in the case. In University of Manchester v John McAslan & Partners Ltd & Anor…

SEDLEY’S LAWS IN THE MODERN AGE: ELECTRONIC BUNDLES “SOME OF THE PAGES MUST APPEAR UPSIDE DOWN, PREFERABLY AT SPORADIC INTERVALS”
The post yesterday on Sedley’s Laws of documents led to me to consider how this should be applied in the modern age. More specifically to electronic bundles. These musings led to contributions from the lawyers of Twitter. We clearly have…

BUNDLES: SEDLEY’S LAW REVISITED: HAS MUCH CHANGED OVER THE PAST NINE YEARS?
Nine years after it was first published I am re-visiting a very early post on this blog. Regular readers will know that the issue of trial and hearing bundles have featured regularly over the intervening period. It is not uncommon…

CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE ON DEPUTYSHIP AND COURT OF PROTECTION COSTS: SUCCESSFUL APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT
I am grateful to Daniel Slade from Express Solicitors for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Soole in AAA -v- BBB [2022] EWHC 3103 (KB). It is a case where the claimant was successful in appealing…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: TRIAL BUNDLES, LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND LATE DISCLOSURE: CASES NEED TO BE PREPARED PROPERLY
I am grateful to my colleague Eleanor Temple for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ-Davis-White KC in the case of Ball -v- Ball (11th October 2022), a copy of the judgment is available here Ball v Ball…

EVIDENCE OF STATISTICS FROM DEFENDANTS’ SOLICITORS RELATING TO CLAIMS NOT EXCLUDED: HIGH COURT DECISION
The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Kerseviciene v Quadri & Anor [2022] EWHC 2951 (KB) is of considerable interest to anyone involved in litigation, particular personal injury litigation. The judge upheld a finding that a witness statement from the…

CONSEQUENTIAL ISSUES AFTER JUDGMENT IS HANDED DOWN: NO TIME TO START ACTING UP
The judgment of Mr Justice Foxton in Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Ltd & Ors v Tughans (a firm) [2022] EWHC 2825 (Comm) shows considerable concern about the way in which parties are attempting to deal with issues following the…

“NO ORDINARY LITIGANT WOULD INCUR COSTS APPROACHING £50,000 IN ORDER TO RECOVER £3,000”: DATA BREACH CASE TRANSFERRED FROM HIGH COURT TO SMALL CLAIMS TRACK
In Cleary v Marston (Holdings) Ltd [2021] EWHC 3809 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin ordered a transfer of a data breach case from the High Court to the small claims track in the county court. “It is important that claimants…

TRANSFERRING A CASE FROM THE PROTOCOL TO PART 7: THE APPROPRIATE TEST CONSIDERED
I am grateful to Jamie Carpenter KC for sending me a copy of the judgment in The London Borough of Islington -v- Borous [2022] EWCA Civ 1242, a The case was looked at yesterday. Here I want to consider the…

EXPERTS GIVING EVIDENCE DO NOT HAVE AN EXPECTATION OF ANONYMITY: MATTERS OF FREE SPEECH ARE IN ISSUE
The previous post dealt with the judgment of HHJ Richard Clarke in Hertfordshire County Council v Mother & Ors [2022] EWFC 106, in particular the critique of the expert evidence. In a subsequent judgment Hertfordshire County Council v Mother & Ors [2022]…

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PROTOCOL LEADS TO COSTS OF A MEDICAL REPORT NOT BEING RECOVERED
I was informed recently that permission to appeal was refused in the case of Greyson -v- Fuller. I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF for sending me a copy of the decision in Glendining -v- McCarthy,* where DDJ Causton…
COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION TO STRIKE OUT “UNMANAGEABLE” COURT PROCEEDINGS
In Municipio De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 951 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision to strike out a claim. The Court doubted whether an action could ever be described…

NINE YEARS ON IV: 2016: BEING LEGALLY STREETWISE: WHAT THEY DON’T TEACH YOU IN LAW SCHOOL
Continuing with the selection of post from each year of the blog I have reproduced below a post from February 2016. This post was unusual in that I saw a post from a firm of solicitors, Darlingtons, and asked permission…

JUDICIAL REVIEW CLAIM SHOULD BE HEARD IN LEEDS: THE USE OF LONDON LAWYERS DOES NOT DRIVE THE CHOICE OF VENUE
In Khyam, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Justice [2022] EWHC 993 (Admin) Mr Justice Fordham was fairly robust in ordering that a judicial review hearing should take place in Leeds. This was the area with…
“IT SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD THAT DELIBERATE FLOUTING OF ORDERS, GUIDANCE AND PROCEDURE IS A FORM OF FORENSIC CHEATING AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH”
In Xanthopoulos v Rakshina [2022] EWFC 30 Mr Justice Mostyn considered some key aspects of procedure, including costs and transparency. Here we look at that part of the judgment that deals with compliance with the rules. “This utter disregard…
You must be logged in to post a comment.