A TRIAL BUNDLE THAT WAS A “CHAOTIC MESS”; NON COMPLIANT WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT REPORTS AND “PROCEDURAL TRENCH WARFARE”
There are interesting procedural aspects in the judgment of Simon Gleeson in Carl v Hawkins & Ors [2024] EWHC 2186 (Ch). The case, about historic sports cars, involved (among other things) “procedural trench warfare”; highly defective bundles; non-compliant witness statements;…
NO “VYING AND REVYING”: WITNESS STATEMENTS, EVIDENCE AND LOTS OF OTHER MATERIAL BESIDES: AFTER 287 YEARS OF JUDICIAL PROMPTING HAVE PRACTITIONERS GOT THE MESSAGE?
Anyone involved in civil litigation will spend a great deal of their time reading witness “evidence” which, in reality, is no such thing. Witness statements tend to be seen as an opportunity to put forward opinions, submissions and innuendo. As…
ENTERING JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT: NO DUTY ON THE PARTIES TO HELP EACH OTHER: THE IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING THE RULES
There are some interesting observations in the judgment of HHJ Cadwallader (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) in Thiscompany Ltd & Ors v Welsh & Ors [2024] EWHC 2159 (Comm). It was a case where three of the…
THE AUTOMATIC STAY UNDER CPR 15.11 AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A CASE IN POINT
In Michael Wilson & Partners, Ltd v Short [2024] EWHC 2113 (Ch) Master Clark granted the claimant relief from sanctions in a case that had become automatically stayed under CPR 15.11. This case serves as a reminder, if nothing else,…
IF YOU ARE GOING TO PROPOSE CHANGES TO A DRAFT JUDGMENT THE OTHER SIDE MUST BE NOTIFIED FIRST
The judgment of Ms. Pat Treacy (setting as a judge of the Chancery Division) in Parsons v Convatec Ltd [2024] EWHC 2111 (Pat) contains a reminder of the importance of a party notifying the other side immediately if they are going…
PROVING THINGS 240: PROVING THE “EELES” CRITERIA ON AN APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT: GAPS IN THE EVIDENCE PREVENT A FINAL DETERMINATION BEING MADE
In XS1 (A Child) v West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust [2024] EWHC 1865 (KB) Master Stevens adjourned a claimant’s application for a substantial interim payment. The primary ground for this was that there was insufficient evidence before the court to…
THREE WEBINARS: MAKING APPLICATIONS TO THE COURT; INSOLVENCY AND SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER
In September and October there are a number of webinars relating to procedure and evidence. Firstly on the essential issue (but often overlooked) elements and rules relating to making applications to the court; secondly on insolvency and personal injury and…
SELF PROTECTION FOR LITIGATION LAWYERS – A RECAP: WITNESS STATEMENTS UNDER SCRUTINY
A report in Litigation Futures in August 2016 illustrates the need for “self protection” by lawyers in . The headline says it all “Insurance Fraudster who tried to blame his solicitor jailed for 18 months”. “IT WAS ALL MY…
AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON 1st OCTOBER 2024: A QUICK OVERVIEW
The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.3) Rules 2024 come into force on the 1st October. We will be looking at some of the provisions in detail nearer the time. The new rules can be found here. In the interim period here…
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…
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…
THE CLAIMANT’S CASE WAS NOT STAYED BECAUSE IT COULD NOT PAY INTERLOCUTORY COSTS ORDERS: WON’T PAY IS VERY DIFFERENT TO CAN’T PAY
In J Robbins Capital Partners Ltd v Zamsort Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1990 (Comm) Paul Stanley KC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) refused the defendants’ application that the action be stayed pending the claimant’s payment of interlocutory…
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…
COURT REFUSES TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: CLAIMANTS COME TO GRIEF
In Playfair & Ors v Pannells LLP & Ors [2024] EWHC 1933 (Ch) Master Brightwell refused the claimants’ application for an extension of time for service of the claim form. The application was made before the time of expiry for…
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]…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN WITNESS EVIDENCE SERVED THREE WEEKS LATE: SOMETHING ABOUT THE DANGERS OF “CUT AND PASTE” SUBMISSIONS TOO…
In Seaton Management Ltd v Evans-Jones [2024] EWHC 1883 (Ch) ICC Judge Barber refused the respondent’s application for relief from sanctions when a witness statement was served three weeks late. “The matters addressed in the Respondent’s skeleton argument on…
THERE IS A LEGALLY SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN APPEAL LODGED OUT OF TIME AND ONE LODGED IN TIME, BUT WITH DOCUMENTS MISSING: COURT OF APPEAL OBSERVATIONS ON EAT RULES
It is rare for this blog to consider anything related to employment law, let alone procedure in the Employment Tribunals. However the Court of Appeal decision in Ridley v HB Kirtley t/a Queen’s Court Business Centre [2024] EWCA Civ 875…
RECENT CASES IN FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION – WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THEM? WEBINAR 30th JULY 2024
This webinar looks at recent cases in relation to liability, quantum and damages involving fatal accident victims. It enables us to spend enough time looking at each case in detail, in particular the evidence that was adduced and the conclusions…
THE CORONERS’ COURT, COMPETENCES, FUNDING AND HELP WITH DEALING WITH THE BEREAVED CLIENT: USEFUL LINKS
Today I have presented a webinar on the coroners’ courts. The webinar has a particular emphasis on helping the client through the process, and the “competences” set out in the joint documents between the SRA, CILEx and the Bar Standards…
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…
WRITING INFLAMMATORY THINGS IN COURT DOCUMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE: IT NEVER, EVER, HELPS
We are looking at the judgment of HHJ Edward Hess in TM v KM [2022] EWFC 155 for two reasons: firstly the costs involved; secondly the judge’s observations about the unattractiveness of putting personal pejorative remarks in court documents. There…
COST BITES 170: IF YOU MAKE AN APPLICATION, HAVE IT HEARD BUT WITHDRAW IT PRIOR TO JUDGMENT THEN YOU ARE PAYING ALL THE COSTS (ALTHOUGH NOT NECESSARILY ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS)
In Hill v Touchlight Genetics Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1801 Mrs Justice Joanna Smith considered issues relating to costs where the claimant abandoned her application to amend after the hearing, but prior to judgment. The judge held that the…
WITNESS STATEMENTS A GUIDE FOR GRADE C FEE EARNERS (AND THOSE WHO SUPERVISE THEM): WEBINAR 18th JULY 2024
On the 18th July I am giving a webinar “Drafting witness statements in high value personal injury claims: A guide for Grade C fee earners (and those who supervise them)”, booking details are available here. THE REASON FOR THE WEBINAR…
CLAIMANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS IN SERVING NOTICE OF NON-ADMISSION OF AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS: THE APPLICATION WAS LATE, AND THE ARGUMENT WAS HOPELESS
In Invest Bank PSC v El-Husseini & Ors [2024] EWHC 1804 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver refused the claimant bank’s application for relief from sanctions when it served a notice of a notice to prove the authenticity of a document. The…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AND SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE: THE CLAIMANT “HAS ONLY HIMSELF TO BLAME” IN LOSING £1.2 MILLION IN DAMAGES
I am grateful to barrister Matthew Snarr for sending me a better copy of the judgments of HHJ Sephton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Shaw -v- Wilde, a copy of that judgment is available here Shaw v Wilde Final…
POSTMASTERS’ RIGHT TO RECOVER DAMAGES UNDER THE GLO COMPENSATION SCHEME DID NOT VEST IN TRUSTEES IN BANKRUPTCY
Normally when this blog looks at issues relating to insolvency it relates to procedural or other practical problems arising when a party is made insolvent. The judgment of HHJ Cawson KC in Secretary of State for Business and Trade v…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM – ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 5: SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM LATE
This is the fifth time we have looked at the judgment in Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v Bellway Homes Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 1579 (KB). This time we look at another “trap for the unwary” – the Particulars of Claim were…
YOU SIGNED IT – YOU OWN IT: CLAIMANT IN £1.2 MILLION CLAIM FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST AND RECOVERS NOTHING
I am grateful to barrister Matthew Snarr for sending me a copy of the judgments of HHJ Sephton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Shaw -v- Wilde, copies of those judgments are available here shaw-v-wilde-judgment . I will…
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…
You must be logged in to post a comment.