PART 36: SHOULD THE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES APPLY WHEN A CLAIMANT HAD, EFFECTIVELY, OFFERED "NIL" ON A COUNTERCLAIM (THAT FAILED)?

PART 36: SHOULD THE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES APPLY WHEN A CLAIMANT HAD, EFFECTIVELY, OFFERED “NIL” ON A COUNTERCLAIM (THAT FAILED)?

Here we are looking at some interesting arguments on Part 36 put forward by an, obviously disappointed, defendant.  The claimant had beaten its own Part 36 offer and defeated the defendant’s counterclaim totally.  Nevertheless, the defendant argued, this was not…

WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION 2025: WEBINAR 4th AUGUST 2025

WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION 2025: WEBINAR 4th AUGUST 2025

This webinar looks at what to do when things go wrong in civil litigation.   There is a continual flow of reports that deal with errors made in relation to limitation, service or someone falling foul of the rules or court…

MEMBER NEWS: THE BACK CATALOGUE 4: WHY CIVIL PROCEDURE CAN SOMETIMES  NOT BE A BUNDLE OF FUN:  AND WHY BUNDLES CAN LEAD TO WASTED COSTS ORDERS...

MEMBER NEWS: THE BACK CATALOGUE 4: WHY CIVIL PROCEDURE CAN SOMETIMES NOT BE A BUNDLE OF FUN: AND WHY BUNDLES CAN LEAD TO WASTED COSTS ORDERS…

It may surprise people to know how important bundles are to the conduct of civil litigation. It is even more surprising how problematic they can become.  Posts about bundles, and the problems they can present in civil litigation,  have always…

PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 4: WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS WHEN THE CLAIMANT INITIALLY SUED THE WRONG DEFENDANT BUT THE ACTION WAS NOT STRUCK OUT?

PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 4: WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS WHEN THE CLAIMANT INITIALLY SUED THE WRONG DEFENDANT BUT THE ACTION WAS NOT STRUCK OUT?

Litigators and litigants are always particularly interested in knowing what the costs consequences of a hearing was. We get an opportunity to consider this here, looking at the costs order of a judgment we have already considered.  What should the…

MATTERS "NOT MENTIONED IN THE WITNESS STATEMENT": ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF OMISSIONS GIIVING RISE TO ADVERSE CONCLUSIONS

MATTERS “NOT MENTIONED IN THE WITNESS STATEMENT”: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF OMISSIONS GIIVING RISE TO ADVERSE CONCLUSIONS

We are looking again at the significance of matters not mentioned in a witness statement.  This is another case where the judge found that there had been significant omissions in the claimant’s evidence.  Again it is a case where these omissions…

KEY OMISSIONS AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: A FAILURE TO MENTION KEY POINTS IN THE STATEMENT DOES NOT HELP THE WITNESS: A WORKING EXAMPLE

KEY OMISSIONS AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: A FAILURE TO MENTION KEY POINTS IN THE STATEMENT DOES NOT HELP THE WITNESS: A WORKING EXAMPLE

The theme for several of the posts today is how important it is to put information, that could be viewed as adverse to the witness, into a witness statement.  If such information is left out, but revealed in cross-examination this…

WHY IS THIS SOLICITOR GIVING EVIDENCE? NOT REALLY A QUESTION YOU WANT A JUDGE TO ASK: PARTICULARLY WHEN THE ANSWER IS “I DON’T KNOW” BUT “I WAS PAID TO DO SO”

An earlier post looked at a case where the court struck out large parts of a witness statement of a solicitor who was proposing to give evidence at trial.  Here we look at what happened to the remaining parts of…

MEMBER NEWS: THE BACK CATALOGUE 3: THE COST BITES SERIES  - 258 POSTS SO FAR AND NO SIGN OF STOPPING...

MEMBER NEWS: THE BACK CATALOGUE 3: THE COST BITES SERIES – 258 POSTS SO FAR AND NO SIGN OF STOPPING…

We can wager a bet (for charity of course) that 99.9% of litigators and 100% of litigants who read a judgment think – who paid the costs? The aim of this series, started in July 2022, was to enable practitioners…

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS JUSTICE COMMITTEE: THE CURRENT STATE OF THE COUNTY COURT:  RAT INFESTED BUILDINGS: A "DYSFUNCTIONAL SYSTEM" THAT "HAS FAILED ADEQUATELY" TO DELIVER CIVIL JUSTICE: (NO PAYWALL)

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS JUSTICE COMMITTEE: THE CURRENT STATE OF THE COUNTY COURT: RAT INFESTED BUILDINGS: A “DYSFUNCTIONAL SYSTEM” THAT “HAS FAILED ADEQUATELY” TO DELIVER CIVIL JUSTICE: (NO PAYWALL)

In the Civil Justice system we do not have a figure such as the Secret Barrister who can publicise the major problems that exist in the county court. The House of Commons Justice Committee have gone a long way to…

ORDERS EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM SET ASIDE: THE DUTIES OF THE APPLICANT WERE NOT COMPLIED WITH: THE CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF

ORDERS EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM SET ASIDE: THE DUTIES OF THE APPLICANT WERE NOT COMPLIED WITH: THE CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF

If there is any application that should make a claimant’s lawyer extremely uncomfortable it is making a without notice application to extend time for service of the claim form.  If you add to this an application (made late) for permission…

ALLOCATION TO THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK OR FAST TRACK IN HOUSING CASES: A JUDGMENT ON THE ISSUE (AND A PLUG FOR A WEBINAR ON THAT VERY POINT...)

ALLOCATION TO THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK OR FAST TRACK IN HOUSING CASES: A JUDGMENT ON THE ISSUE (AND A PLUG FOR A WEBINAR ON THAT VERY POINT…)

We are looking at a judgment about allocation in a housing disrepair case.  The story is a common one. The claimant wants the matter allocated to the Fast Track – so costs can be recovered. The defendant wants the matter…

THE COURT WOULD NOT STRIKE OUT A CLAIM BECAUSE OF ERRORS IN THE RESPONSE PACK: "THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE IS NOT FURTHERED BY PARTIES SEEKING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF TECHNICAL BREACHES"

THE COURT WOULD NOT STRIKE OUT A CLAIM BECAUSE OF ERRORS IN THE RESPONSE PACK: “THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE IS NOT FURTHERED BY PARTIES SEEKING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF TECHNICAL BREACHES”

Here we look at a case where a claimant made amendments to the response pack because service was going to take place abroad. The response pack then contained errors in relation to the times by which the defendant should take…

EXPERT'S REPORT DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES: ALL PARTIES AGREED IT WAS "FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED" AND COULD NOT BE RELIED UPON: JUDGE STATES THAT EXPERT SHOULD CONSIDER REPAYING THE FEE

EXPERT’S REPORT DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES: ALL PARTIES AGREED IT WAS “FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED” AND COULD NOT BE RELIED UPON: JUDGE STATES THAT EXPERT SHOULD CONSIDER REPAYING THE FEE

Here we are looking a  judgment given last week where all the parties involved in a case agreed that an expert’s report was “fundamentally flawed”.  Part of the report was based on a rejection of findings of fact that had…