PROVING THINGS 238: TAX AND FILMS: A DANGEROUS MIX – BUT THE CLAIMANTS FAILED TO PROVE THEY HAD LOST ANYTHING
In Upham & Ors v HSBC UK Bank PLC [2024] EWHC 849 (Comm) Mr Justice Bright considered the losses said to be suffered by a number of claimants who had invested in a tax deferment scheme. Most of the claimants…
DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM STRUCK OUT BECAUSE THE DEFENDANT RELIED ON WITHOUT PREJUDICE COMMUNICATIONS
In West v Churchill & Anor [2024] EWHC 940 (Ch) HHJ Keyser KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) struck out a defence and counterclaim that referred to without prejudice negotiations and correspondence. There had been no agreement reached between…
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…
A COURT CANNOT SIMPLY IGNORE AN UNCHALLENGED EXPERT REPORT: DOG SAVED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
The significance of unchallenged expert evidence at court was considered by the Administrative Court in Fitzgerald v CPS [2024] EWHC 869 (Admin). Although this is a criminal case it considers the authorities in civil actions and the central point that…
PROCEDURE, DAMAGES, LIABILITY, COSTS AND LIMITATION: A SERIES OF WEBINARS THIS YEAR AIMING TO HELP AVOID OR DEAL WITH PROBLEMS IN LITIGATION
The issues arising from many of the cases looked at on this blog are being considered in a series of webinars starting later this month. The webinars cover many of the problem areas of litigation: what to do when things…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: “SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE” CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In the judgment given today in Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC 806 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie dismissed the claimant’s claim as being fundamentally dishonest. The judgment contains a detailed consideration of the issues relating to the…
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE COURTS: SELECTED HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE JUDICIAL GUIDANCE
We have looked before at problems caused by Artificial Intelligence being used in court. It is worthwhile looking at the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary publication “Artificial Intelligence (AI) Guidance for Judicial Office Holders. It shows some of the dangers in…
WITNESS STATEMENTS AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: WHEN LAWYERS CAN BE THEIR OWN WORSE ENEMIES: “THE ABSENCE OF SUCH EVIDENCE IS IN THE NATURE OF A DEAFENING SILENCE”
There are numerous, indeed hundreds, of posts on this blog that deal with the difficulties that can arise in relation to witness statements and witness evidence. Often it is a failure to address basic and fundamental points in relation to…
WHEN WITNESSES TOTALLY CHANGE THEIR EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: A CASE IN POINT
In Advantage Insurance Company Ltd v Harris [2024] EWHC 626 (KB) HHJ Russen KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that a claimant in a personal injury action had been in contempt of court for making false statements. It…
COST BITES 138: IN THE ABSENCE OF A CHARGING CLAUSE THE SOLICITOR COULD NOT BE PAID FOR ACTING AS AN EXECUTOR (SEE ALSO “PROVING THINGS…)
In Brealey v Shepherd & Co Solicitors [2024] EWCA Civ 303 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that a solicitor Executor could not charge for legal work done in the absence of a charging clause in a will. Although…
THE VEXED QUESTION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS WHEN THE MAKER CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH: LEADS TO MAJOR PROBLEMS AND A WASTED COSTS ORDER
We are going to be looking twice at the decision of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Rainer Hughes Solicitors v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd & Ors (Rev1) [2024] EWHC 585 (KB). The next post will look at procedure in…
THE DANGERS OF SERVING A NOTICE OF NON-ADMISSION: LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING AWARDED
Another aspect of the judgment in Duke of Sussex & Ors v MGN Ltd (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 274 (Ch) was the defendant’s conduct in serving a notice of non-admission. Service of the notice led to considerable extra costs being incurred. …
PROVING THINGS 237: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE, FAILS TO PROVE IT HAD SUFFERED DAMAGES HAD IT SUCCEEDED (SOMETHING ABOUT EXPERT EVIDENCE TOO)
In Hamsard One Thousand And Forty-Three Ltd v AE Insurance Brokers Ltd [2024] EWHC 262 (Comm) the claimant failed to establish its case. The judgment shows many issues with the claimant’s evidence, in particular the problems that flowed from issues…
CHANGES TO THE FIXED COSTS RULES 2: 20 PAGES IN AN EXPERT’S REPORT DOES NOT MEAN 20 PAGES
Another change being introduced on the 6th April 2024 is a change (or possibly clarification) in relation to to the number of pages in an expert report in the Intermediate Track. The substantive report is still limited to 20 pages….
“TELL ME MORE, TELL ME MORE”: COURT OF APPEAL SENDS OUT CLEAR MESSAGE OF THE DANGERS OF SEEKING “CLARIFICATION” OF A JUDGMENT: IT MIGHT NOT GET YOU VERY FAR…
In YM (Care Proceedings) (Clarification of Reasons) [2024] EWCA Civ 71 the Court of Appeal issued a clear warning about the misuse of the practice of “seeking clarification” from the judge following a judgment. The decision is aimed specifically at…
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE JUDGMENT WAS NOT RECORDED? APPEAL PROCEEDS BY WAY OF A REHEARING
There are interesting issues considered in the judgment of Mr Recorder Adrian Jack in AS v AB [2024] EWFC 24. A party was appealing. The recording (and backup recording) failed to record the judge’s judgment and there was no agreed…
ATTEMPTING TO GIVE NEW EVIDENCE WHEN THE ADVOCATE IS MAKING SUBMISSIONS: ANOTHER ISSUE IN THE POST OFFICE CASE
The recent post about the decision in Karimi, R (On the Application Of) v Sheffield City Council [2024] EWHC 93 (Admin), caused me to review another earlier blog post about the Post Office case. It concerned an attempt to introduce new…
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…
EVERY LITTLE HELPS: EACH DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY £18,000 EXEMPLARY DAMAGES IN STAGED CRASH CASE
The judgment of HHJ Baucher in Alghafagi v Tesco Stores Ltd [2023] EW Misc 19 (CC) is one of a series of judgments in related cases. It relates to what the judge has found to be a complex conspiracy to…
THE WITNESS EVIDENCE AT TRIAL WAS DIFFERENT TO THE PLEADED CASE AND THE WITNESS STATEMENTS: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WHY CARE IS NEEDED
Earlier this month I posted an article on the need for “self protection” by lawyers when drafting witness statements. An example of why care is needed can be seen in the judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies, sitting as a High…
DAMAGES FOR THE SELF EMPLOYED AND THOSE INVOLVED IN ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORT: WEBINAR 25th JANUARY 2024
On the 24th January there is a webinar looking at claims for damages for self-employed people. It also looks at the issues relating to losses, particularly loss of earnings, caused by those involved in sports and entertainment (it also looks…
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…
EXPERTS NOT QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON THE MATTERS THEY DID: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT DECISION
Another example of expert evidence going awry can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Balachandra v The General Dental Council [2024] EWHC 18 . The experts in question were giving evidence in relation to matters that…
“AN EXPERT WITNESS IS NOT HELPING THE COURT BY TRYING TO MAKE THE EVIDENCE FIT THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS”: JUDGE FINDS EXPERT “UNPROFESSIONAL AND UNACCEPTABLE”
In LCC v V & B [2023] EWFC 268 HHJ Booth commented on one of the expert witnesses. He found that the evidence given involved conjecture. The criticism of the expert is robust. “An expert witness is not helping…
“MY LAWYER DRAFTED MY STATEMENT”: A REMINDER OF THE NEED FOR SELF-PROTECTION
We have seen a high profile example recently of a witness stating that their statement had been drafted by the lawyers involved. This is not a rare occurrence. Here is a recap of some of the issues that litigators need…
MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE 5: ATTEMPTS TO PUT THE COURT “IN TERROREM” WERE NOT WELCOME
In March 2019 I wrote about the judgment in Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd (No 3) [2019] EWHC 606 (QB), the post noted that “parts of the judgment set out arguments and conduct of litigation that is, to say the…
MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE 4: THE POST OFFICE’S ATTEMPT TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE AND ITS CLAIM TO HAVE “SUPERNATURAL POWERS”
On March 16 2019 this blog had three separate posts on the Post Office case. The post repeated here gives an example of the Post Office’s extremely “robust” strategy. It attempted to strike out a large part of the claimants’…
MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE 3: THE POST OFFICE’S APPLICATION THAT THE JUDGE RECUSE THEMSELVES BECAUSE HE WAS “BIASED” AGAINST THEM
The Post Office was so convinced of the righteousness of its case that it determined that any findings against it must be due to judicial bias. Having lost some applications before the trial judge it attempted to have the judge…
WITNESS EVIDENCE AND WITNESS DEMEANOUR: A GEM OF A CASE: A WITNESS SUMMONS CAN LEAD TO UNWELCOME SURPRISES
Issues of witness demeanour and credibility figured highly in the judgment of District Judge Dinan-Hayward in TM v AM [2023] EWFC 247. It is an interesting story which shows the risks of compelling a witness to attend court and of…
MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE 2: THE JUDGE’S VIEW ON WITNESS CREDIBILITY
I am repeating a post first written in 2019. Matters that are in the public consciousness now were very much in the consciousness of the legal profession then. This post dealt with the trial judge’s view of the credibility of…
DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THE CLAIMANT’S STATEMENT IS SIMPLY A REHASH OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
I am grateful to barrister Nadia Whittaker for sending me a copy of the judgment of Recorder Sheehan KC in the case of Ball -v- The Wolverhampton NHS Trust. It is a working example of the difficulties that flow when…
MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE: LOOKING BACK TO THE CASE OF THE YEAR 2019
Yesterday I noticed that a post I had written in 2019 was suddenly gaining a lot of readers. I suspect that this was due to the power of television. Not that the blog was being advertised, but that the series…
CIVIL LITIGATION 2023: A BRIEF REVIEW
I am not sure whether the facts and figures from this site can show any major trends in civil litigation. Here is a quick look back at some numbers from 2023. MOST VIEWED POSTS: THE TOP 10 (to date)…
USING AI TO SEARCH FOR CASE LAW AND MAKE SUBMISSIONS: IT MAKES CASES UP – IT REALLY DOES
If ever there was a judgment where the clue is in the name it is Harber v Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (INCOME TAX – penalties for failure to notify liability to CGT – appellant relied on case…
GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT
In a judgment today TUI UK Ltd v Griffiths [2023] UKSC 48 the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the majority of the Court of Appeal. It is an important decision on procedural fairness. In particular the duty of a…
EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: WEBINAR 24TH JANUARY 2024: ESSENTIAL ISSUES FOR ALL LITIGATORS AND EXPERTS
Over the course of 2023 we saw many cases in which the conduct of experts and those who instruct them came under close scrutiny and criticism in the courts. I am presenting a webinar on the 24th January 2024 reviewing…
COSTS OF £50,000 ORDERED TO BE PAID BY LITIGATION FRIEND: “HE WILLINGLY TOOK ON THE ROLE OF LITIGATION FRIEND AND HIS PERFORMANCE HAS BEEN WHOLLY INADEQUATE”
In Y v Z [2023] EWFC 205 HHJ Edward Hess ordered that the litigation friend for the respondent pay, personally, the applicant’s costs caused by the need to adjourn a hearing. The respondent had not prepared at all for the…
WHY DIDN’T YOU TELL ME THAT BEFORE WE WENT INTO COURT? THINGS LAWYERS LEARN HALF WAY THROUGH A TRIAL: A REPOST
The repost last week of a case where key facts came to light on the third day of a trial led me another post on the topic which is worth revisiting. After the first post was written I asked lawyers if…
THE THINGS YOU FIND OUT HALF WAY THROUGH A TRIAL… A CASE VERY MUCH TO POINT: A REPOST
As part of the process of re-blogging posts that remain of general interest we are looking again at the case of Jollah, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No. 2) [2017] EWHC 2821 (Admin)…
DOES WHAT YOU WEAR MATTER? GUIDANCE FOR ADVOCATES AND LITIGANTS: ANOTHER ISSUE REVISITED
This is a part of the series revisiting previous posts. Here we go back to November 2018. The question was asked – does how you dress affect how you are perceived? This followed a tweet (from the USA) where a …
PROVING THINGS 235: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF DEFENDANT: THE JUDGE’S FINDINGS WERE NOT OPEN TO HIM: THE FACTUAL FINDINGS WERE WRONG
The Court of Appeal judgment today in Clements-Siddall v Dunbobbin Hotels Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 1300 is a rare example of the Court of Appeal overturning a judge’s findings on the facts. It is also an example of the importance…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 100: WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A REMINDER OF THE KEY POINTS IN GESTMIN
Now that we have reached 100 it is a good time to revisit the basic issue of how the court assesses witness credibility. We are therefore looking at the basic guidance given in Gestmin SGPS SA v Credit Suisse (UK) Limited…
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…
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…
WEBINARS ON DAMAGES IN 2024: SOMETHING TO WARM UP THE WINTER DAYS EARLY IN THE NEW YEAR…
Early next year I am presenting a series of eight webinars on personal injury damages. The series looks at the major heads of damages for personal injury and clinical negligence cases, with a particular emphasis on those claims in the…
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…
THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE HANDBOOK FOR LITIGANTS IN PERSON: A REMINDER OF THE FOUR GOLDEN RULES FOR DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS
It is ten years since the publication of the Handbook for Litigants in Person. It can be found here. I wrote about it, briefly, when it was first published. Although there have been some procedural changes since the section on…
PROVING THINGS 233: THE DEFENDANT WAS NEGLIGENT – BUT THE DAMAGES ARE NIL
In Hope Capital Ltd v Alexander Reece Thomson LLP [2023] EWHC 2389 (KB) Mr Justice Constable found that the claimant had suffered no loss. This could be an expensive loss for the claimant, after a seven day trial. “”For these…
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. …
You must be logged in to post a comment.