SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM – ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 4: NOW IT IS THE DEFENDANTS THAT HAVE MADE MISTAKES: AN IMPROPERLY SERVED CLAIM FORM IS NOT A NULLITY
NB AN APPEAL WAS ALLOWED IN THIS CASE SEE Bellway Homes Ltd v The Occupiers of Samuel Garside House [2025] EWCA Civ 1347 We are continuing with the judgment in Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v Bellway Homes Ltd & Anor [2024]…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 1: LEAVING SERVICE UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE AND THEN NOT SERVING PROPERLY (BY FAX OR DX)
NB AN APPEAL WAS ALLOWED IN THIS CASE SEE Bellway Homes Ltd v The Occupiers of Samuel Garside House [2025] EWCA Civ 1347 The judgment of Master Dagnall in Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v Bellway Homes Ltd & Anor…
IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO USE PART 11 WHEN CHALLENGING A TRADE UNION’S RIGHT TO BRING AN ACTION FOR DEFAMATION
In Prospect v Evans [2024] EWHC 1533 (KB) Mrs Justice Steyn held that a challenge to a trade union’s right to bring defamation proceedings should not have been made by using Part 11. Part 11 applications deal with jurisdiction. The…
THE ELEVENTH ANNIVERSARY OF CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF: A LOOK BACK TO THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY
Today marks the 11th anniversary of the setting up of this blog. Rather than review the previous decade I thought it would be a good time to repeat what I said on the first anniversary. The growth and size of…
ANOTHER BLOG FROM THE PAST: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “EVIDENCE” AND “SUBMISSIONS”: A PROBLEM THAT PERSISTS TODAY
As part of the 11th anniversary process I am looking at a blog that was written in June 2014. “WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE FOR FACTS: KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS (AND WHY IT MATTERS)”. It is very interesting to…
SUING THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE
Next week marks the 11th anniversary of this blog. I am reviewing key posts from the past. This was the second ever post on the 25th June 2013. The issues remain relevant. I have issued periodical reminders about this issue…
THE JUDGE HAD ADJOURNED THE HANDING DOWN OF A JUDGMENT AND RETAINED A DISCRETION OVER PERMISSION TO APPEAL: AN ISSUE LIKE LONDON BUSES – TWO ARRIVE ALMOST AT ONCE
I cannot recall a case where, in the space of a week, there have been two cases about the circumstances in which a trial judge can give permission to appeal after judgment has been handed down. The second for the…
THE HIGH COURT DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO HEAR AN APPEAL FROM A CIRCUIT JUDGE WHEN THAT DECISION WAS ITSELF AN APPEAL: DECISION ON THIS POINT
It is always important to remember that appeals from Circuit Judges, which are themselves a decision made on appeal, can only be heard by the Court of Appeal. In Jarvis v Metro Taxis Ltd [2024] EWHC 1452 (KB) Mr Justice…
CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER ON LIABILITY NOT EFFECTIVE WHEN CAUSATION WAS STILL AT LARGE: NOT AN EFFECTIVE TRY
In Elbanna v Clark (Re Consequential Matters) [2024] EWHC 1471 (KB) Mr Justice Sweeting found that a claimant’s Part 36 offer to accept 75% of liability was too ambiguous to be effective when issues of causation were also to be…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ISSUES ONE: WHEN CAN YOU (AND WHEN MUST YOU) SERVE ON A NOMINATED SOLICITOR?
There has not been a case on (mis)service of the claim form on this blog for 14 days now. It may be an appropriate time to go back to one of the problem areas – service on a solicitor. There…
WHEN SHOULD A PART 20 DEFENDANT BE LIABLE TO PAY THE PART 20 CLAIMANT’S COSTS OF DEFENDING THE MAIN ACTION? THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED
In Alison Healey (Widow And Executrix of the Estate of Simon Andrew Healey, Deceased) v Mr Daniel McgRath [2024] EWHC 1360 (KB) Dexter Dias KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered the question of whether it was appropriate…
TALES FROM THE LEGAL ACTION GROUP HOUSING LAW CONFERENCE (II): PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS AND THE HOUSING LAWYER’S DILEMMA
At the Housing Law Conference last Friday I had the pleasure of meeting, and lecturing with, one of the doyenne’s of housing law, Giles Peaker, author of the “Nearly Legal” blog on housing law. Naturally I was pleased to leave…
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…
COST BITES 155: HOW PARTICULAR SHOULD POINTS OF DISPUTE BE? AINSWORTH PRINCIPLES APPLY TO INTERPARTES ASSESSMENTS
In Wazen v Khan [2024] EWHC 1083 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered the question of how detailed and particularised points of dispute have to be. In particular whether the principles in Ainsworth v Stewarts Law LLP [2020] EWCA Civ…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY COST CLAIMANT £325,000 IN DEFENCE COSTS EVEN AFTER THE CLAIM HAD BEEN DISCONTINUED
I am grateful to Louise Jackson from Clyde & Co for drawing my attention to her piece about a recent settlement in a case where fundamental dishonesty was alleged. This is not a case that got to trial. However it…
“AN UNWIELDLY COLLECTION OF COURT DOCUMENTS”: A JUDGMENT THAT ENDS THE “BUNDLE DROUGHT”
It has been six months since this blog featured a complaint about trial bundles. That barren period is ended by some observations of Costs Judge Leonard in Griffin v Kleyman & Co Solicitors Ltd *[2024] EWHC 1151 (SCCO). The bundle…
THE REAL DANGER OF LAWYERS GETTING INVOLVED IN THE JOINT STATEMENT OF EXPERTS: IT IS WRONG AND IT IS COSTLY: A CASE THAT ILLUSTRATES THE POINT
In Glover & Anor v Fluid Structural Engineers & Technical Designers Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1257 (TCC) Mr Simon Lofthouse K.C., sitting as a High Court Judge, considered the issues that arose when a party had tried to influence…
PART 36 THE PAST 12 MONTHS: HOW HUGH GRANT AND THE DUKE OF SUSSEX FEATURE IN A WEBINAR ABOUT CIVIL PROCEDURE: USEFUL WATCHING IF YOU HAVE TIME TO SPARE…
The webinar I gave on the 13th May discussing Part 36 cases over the previous 12 months is now available on YouTube on this link. Cases looked at include: Holden -v- Holden – were Part 36 offers valid offers? Colicci…
AN ACTION THAT HAS BEEN “WAREHOUSED” WILL NORMALLY BE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: COMPELLING REASONS TO THE CONTRARY ARE REQUIRED
In Watford Control Instruments Ltd v Brown [2024] EWHC 1125 (Ch) Mr Justice Richards struck out the claimants action on the grounds that it had “warehoused” the action for several years and this amounted to an abuse of process. Such…
A HANDY TIP FOR ANYONE GOING TO THE LEEDS BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURT ON MONDAY: THEY HAVE MOVED…
HMCTS have sent out notice that from Monday 13 May 2024, the Business and Property Court in Leeds will being hearing cases at its new base in West Gate, Grace Street, Leeds. The fourth-floor suite houses four courtrooms and is…
“GOOGLESPOOFING” AND THIRD PARTY DISCLOSURE: DEFENDANT FAILS TO PERSUADE THE COURT THAT RECORDINGS ARE NECESSARY
In Parker v Skyfire Insurance Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 1060 (KB) Mrs Justice Dias dismissed a defendant’s appeal against a refusal to give disclosure of documents of a third party car hire company. The documents were not necessary to dispose…
INCREASE IN COURT FEES FROM THE 1ST MAY 2024
Court fees increased from the 1st May. Details of all court fees increased can be seen here. The increases apply in family and tribunal proceedings in addition to civil cases. 172 court fees have been increased by 10%. Here we…
REMISSION TO THE COUNTY COURT: WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
In Sherman & Anor v Reader Offers Ltd (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 412 the Court of Appeal set out the limits that exist when a case is remitted to the county court for an assessment of damages following a successful…
ANOTHER PART 8 CASE THAT HAS TO GO TO PART 7: THE RISK THAT THE COURT WILL MAKE “ILL-INFORMED DECISIONS THAT WILL NOT FINALLY DISPOSE OF THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PARTIES”
In TClarke Contracting Ltd v Bell Build Ltd [2024] EWHC 992 (TCC) Mr Justice Pepperall decided that an action, commenced under Part 8, must proceed under Part 7. “In my judgment, the proposed use of the Part 8 procedure in…
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…
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…
LAWYERS MUST LIKE LIVING DANGEROUSLY: APPLICATION MADE THREE MINUTES BEFORE DEADLINE: THE CLAIMANT SCRAPES HOME…
In Lloyds Developments Ltd v Accor HotelServices UK Ltd [2024] EWHC 941 (TCC) Mrs Justice Jefford considered a claimant’s application for an extension of time to comply with a peremptory order which was made 3 minutes prior to the time…
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…
ATTEMPTS TO RE-OPEN ISSUES WHEN A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT: COURT OF APPEAL SAYS NOT AN INVITATION TO RE-ARGUE THE ISSUES
In Supponor Ltd & Anor v AIM Sport Development AG [2024] EWCA Civ 396 the Court of Appeal resisted attempts (by both parties) to re-open key issues after a draft judgment had been sent out. “The primary purpose of this…
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…
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…
WHEN CAN A CLAIM FORM INCLUDE MULTIPLE PARTIES? COURT OF APPEAL REACH BACK TO THE OLD RULES TO HELP
Yesterday I wrote about a case where a judge made strict case management orders in an attempt to deal with an action brought by multiple claimants. The issue of multiple parties was considered today by the Court of Appeal in…
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…
THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES
The Guideline Hourly Rates changed on 1st January 2026. These are set out below. The 2025 and 2024 rates can be found underneath. Guideline hourly rates 2026 (with previous year’s rates in brackets) Grade Fee Earner London 1 London 2…
COURT WOULD NOT SET ASIDE FINAL ORDER FOR DIVORCE CAUSED BY A SOLICITORS ERROR: IT IS MORE THAN A SIMPLE CLICK OF A MOUSE
In Williams v Williams [2024] EWHC 733 (Fam) Sir Andrew McFarlane refused to set aside a final divorce order when the order had been made due to a mistake by the applicant’s solicitors. It is a clear example of the…
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…
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…
THE PROFOUND LACK OF WISDOM IN SIGNING STATEMENTS OF TRUTH ON BEHALF OF YOUR CLIENT: A REPEAT
The post earlier this morning about witness evidence in a case where the Particulars of Claim had been signed by a solicitor has raised some interesting observations. Not least commentators have observed that it is, to say the least, profoundly…
PRACTICE DIRECTION AMENDMENTS COMING INTO FORCE 6th APRIL 2024 (2) VAT AND COUNSEL’S FEES
The 165th update to the Practice Direction comes into force on the 6th April 2024, alongside the 163rd amendment looked at in the previous post. The amendments can be found here. This Practice Direction deals with adding VAT to fixed…
THE 163rd UPDATE TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTIONS: COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 6th APRIL 2024 (1)
There are a number of amendments to Practice Directions coming into force on the 6th April 2024. Details of the 163rd update can be found here. OVERVIEW By way of overview the amendments relate to Civil restrain orders. (New…
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…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: GOOD NEWS FOR THE CLAIMANT (FOR A CHANGE)
NB – THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL – SEE Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities v Rogers [2024] EWCA Civ 1554 In Rogers v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor [2023]…
PARTIES SHOULD BE AWARE OF CONGESTION FACING LITIGANTS IN THE COURTS
The judgment of HHJ Pelling KC in ABT Auto Investments Ltd v Aapico Investment Pte Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1791 (Comm) has recently become available on BAILII. The judge refused an application to amend that was heard one month…
NEW FORMS FOR ANONYMITY ORDERS: GET THE LINK – SEE THE ORDER
Form PF 10 for anonymity orders has been amended. The latest form can be found here. PF10 Anonymity for children and protected parties – prohibition of publication order [HEADING] [TBC] (a child / protected party…
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. …
CLAIMANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE THE JUDGE FOUND FOR THE DEFENDANT ON A BASIS THAT WAS NOT PLEADED
I am grateful to barrister Tom Morris for giving me details of the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Jacobs v Chalcot Crescent (Management) Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 259 (Ch). It is an important case about statements of case. The…
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….
PENAL NOTICES ON ORDERS – CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 6th APRIL 2024: A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE BY THE USE OF THE WORD “BY”
Yesterday we looked at a case where the judge held it was inappropriate for the court to add a penal notice to an existing order. The rules relating to penal notices are changing on the 6th April as a result…
THIS WAS NOT AN APPROPRIATE CASE TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO AN ORDER: COURT WILL DETERMINE THE SUBSTANTIVE DISPUTE INSTEAD
In Wintermute Trading Ltd v Terraform Labs Pte Ltd [2024] EWHC 141 (KB) Mr Justice Lavender considered whether it was appropriate, on the facts of this case, to add a penal notice to an order for disclosure. He held that…
You must be logged in to post a comment.