STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 9: SHARING THE “PAIN”
Most of the burden of complying with time periods and court orders lies with the solicitor. However a solicitor’s life can be made easier by making sure that all those concerned with the litigation process know of the deadlines involved…
SEEKING FURTHER DISCLOSURE: DON’T GO IMPORTING STONES FROM A NEIGHBOURING QUARRY: DISCLOSURE PILOT PREVAILS
In Maher v Maher & Anor [2019] EWHC 3613 (Ch) HHJ Hodge (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused an application for disclosure. There are a number of important points here, including the need for an application for further disclosure to…
CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – JANUARY 2020
Links and articles to blog posts and articles available online in January 2020 Costs Costs Barrister Conditional fee agreements and contentious business agreements Association for Costs Lawyers Oversight regulator praises CLSB’s “considerable progress” Association for Costs Lawyers Offer acceptanc… Enjoying this post? Become…
JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES IN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 2: THE PRINCIPLES (AND THE COSTS!)
We are looking again at the decision of HHJ Kimbell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Molavi v Hibbert & Ors [2020] EWHC, this time relating to the principles to be considered in relation to joinder of additional parties….
JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES INTO EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 1: NOTIFY THE EXISTING PARTIES: THE RULES DON’T SAY SO BUT COMMON SENSE DOES
There are a few interesting procedural matters that flow from the decision of HHJ Kimbell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Molavi v Hibbert & Ors [2020] EWHC 121 (Ch). Here we look at the judge’s comments on…
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: “WAREHOUSING” A CLAIM IS NOT AN ALWAYS ABUSE OF PROCESS (AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT IN ANY EVENT)
In the judgment today in Alibrahim v Asturion Fondation [2020] EWCA Civ 32 the Court of Appeal confirmed that the court should not have struck out a claim that had been left dormant for a period. “Striking out was a…
REDACTING DOCUMENTS: MAY CAUSE ENQUIRIES TO BE MADE AND EXPLANATIONS MAY NEED TO BE GIVEN
One other aspect of the judgment of HHJ Lethem in Ivanoy -v- Lubble (Central London County Court 17th January 2020) is in the orders made after the judgment. It concerns the redaction of documents. THE CASE The primary issue in the…
DISCLOSURE OF SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE LATE: THE FACT THAT THE GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE IS NOT ENOUGH: AN INTERESTING HIGH COURT DECISION
Angus Fergusson has kindly sent me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Grant -v- Newport City Council [2018] EWHC 3813, it is an interesting case where the judge, on appeal, upheld a decision to refuse…
A DECISION THAT WAS “UNJUST BECAUSE OF SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY AND MULTIPLE ERRORS OF LAW”: WHEN DECISIONS ARE NOT BASED ON THE EVIDENCE
I have hesitated before writing about the judgment in H v F [2020] EWHC 86 (Fam). The judgment reviews a highly disturbing first instance decision. I know that many family law commentators have already commented on the case and I…
CLAIMANT WHO FAILS TO OBTAIN COURT FEE REMISSION – CAN RECOVER THE COURT FEE ON APPEAL: CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION ON APPEAL
I am grateful to Jon Heath from Levins,solicitors, for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Lethem in Ivanov -v- Lubble (Central London County Court 17th January 2020). This relates to the issue of whether a claimant, eligible…
APPLYING FOR AN ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A “CUT OUT AND KEEP” GUIDE TO THE AUTHORITIES
It is surprising how often searches that lead to this blog are questions about seeking adjournments on the grounds of ill health. This appears to be common issue. A useful “cut out and keep” summary of the relevant authorities can…
PLEADINGS: CLAIMANTS – TELL THE DEFENDANT THE CASE THAT IT IS GOING TO BE PUT AGAINST THEM
There are some interesting observations as to how a claimant should plead their case in the judgment in Walsh v CP Hart & Sons Ltd [2020] EWHC 37 (QB). “If, as in this case, the Claimant produces only at trial…
ARGUMENT THAT FIXED COSTS APPLIED GETS A BUMPY RIDE: PROTOCOL DOES NOT APPLY TO HIGHWAYS CASE
I am grateful to barrister James Bentley for drawing my attention to the judgment in Bateman v Devon County Council (HHJ Mitchell, Plymouth County Court, 2nd September 2019) in which it was decided that fixed costs did not apply to a…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 77: THE COURT MUST KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4(2)
CPR 35.4(2) is often overlooked. This rule imposes a duty on a party applying for permission to rely on expert evidence to inform the court how much the expert is likely to cost. This is often clear at the costs…
APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 KEY POINTS
We are now nearly six years on from the Denton decision and the principles are familiar to most litigators. However applications for relief from sanctions are still a regular occurrence. Success is never guaranteed. Here I want to look again at…
PROVING THINGS 171: A TALE OF TWO TELEVISION PRESENTERS (AND OF A CASE WHERE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE AT ALL ON VITAL ISSUES)
The judgment of the Employment Tribunal in the case of Ahmed -v- BBC (10th January 2019) has already received wide publicity. It is worthwhile looking at the paucity, often the total absence of evidence, on many key issues on the…
11th HOUR APPLICATION TO INTRODUCE NEW WITNESS EVIDENCE (AND A NEW CASE) REFUSED
In Crumpler & Anor (Liquidators Of Peak Hotels And Resorts Ltd v Candey Limited [2019] EWHC 3558 (Ch) HHJ Davis-White QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused a party relief from sanctions where witness statements were served late. The…
ATTEMPTING TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN SUBMISSIONS AND SUBMISSIONS IN EVIDENCE: SHOULD THE TWAIN EVER MEET?
The recent post on the Post Office case and the defendant’s attempts to introduce new evidence at the submissions stage has caused me to revisit a post from several years ago. This was, in turn, caused by a recollection of…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ON A SOLICITOR (NOT THE FIRST TIME I’VE WRITTEN ABOUT THIS AND PROBABLY NOT THE LAST…)
Every so often, but sometimes I think not often enough, I write posts on the dangers relating to service of the claim form. Here is a quick reminder about the basic principles of serving on a solicitor. This post has…
CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – DECEMBER 2019
Links and articles to blog posts and articles available online from December 2019. Costs Costs Barrister Cash flow and catastrophic personal injury litigation Costs Barrister Fixed costs and translation fees Association for Costs Lawyers Court can order costs in foreign…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – A ROUND UP OF THE ROUND UPS: WHAT TO FRET ABOUT AND WHAT NOT TO FRET ABOUT…
There have been a series of annual reviews on key topics throughout December. To round off the year it seemed a good idea to provide a reminder of them all and put the links in one place 2019 AND CIVIL…
CIVIL LITIGATION CASE OF THE YEAR: BATES -v- THE POST OFFICE: LITIGATING IN THE FACE OF “INSTITUTIONAL PARANOIA”
There was never any doubt in my mind as to the civil litigation case of the year – Bates -v- The Post Office. All civil litigation is here, witness and expert evidence, allegations of bias, disclosure and much more. One…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: FACTS, FIGURES AND SEARCH TERMS: “CAN A DEAD PERSON BE TAKEN TO COURT?”
The statistics at the end of the year are always interesting (to me at least). The search terms that lead to this blog can be quite illuminating (and sometimes quite alarming…). MOST READ POSTS OF 2019 After seven years…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 76: APPEALS – ASKING THE JUDGE FOR REASONS: “EMBARRASSMENT” IS NO EXCUSE NOT TO
The judgment in Fattahi v Charles Grosvenor Ltd [2019] EWHC 3497 (QB) also highlights the advisability of an appellant, arguing that a decision was not properly reasoned, to ask the original judge for further reasons. “I have been unable to…
THE COURT WILL NOT READILY IMPLY SANCTIONS INTO ORDERS THAT DO NOT EXPRESSLY CONTAIN SANCTIONS: AN EARLY CHRISTMAS PRESENT FOR LITIGATORS
In Djurberg v London Borough of Richmond & Ors [2019] EWHC 3342 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh held that a party did not require relief from sanctions when it failed to comply with a court order that did not impose a…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: PART 36: THE GROWTH IN CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFERS – AND WHY THE CONSEQUENCES USUALLY APPLY
Looking back it is clear that this has been a very busy year for cases on Part 36. Part of the reason for this has been the growth in cases relating to claimant’s offers. There are a number of key…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 75: COSTS BUDGETING: COUNSEL’S BRIEF FEE NOW PART OF THE TRIAL PREPARATION PHASE
Judging from the reaction of my opponent (and the judge) at a CCMC I attended today a change in the rules introduced on 1st October 2019 could benefit from wider publication. On the 1st October 2019 Counsel’s brief fee is…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 74: HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND SECTION 4 OF THE CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1995
The judgment of Deputy Master Linwood in Barnaby & Anor v Johnson (aka Smith) [2019] EWHC 3344 (Ch) provides a reminder of the terms of Section 4 of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and an example of its application. …
63 YEARS ON AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES: MUNKMAN ON DAMAGES – ALBEIT WITH A NEW TITLE (1)
The latest edition of what, used to be called, Munkman on Damages is now hot off the press. This is the 14th edition, the first being written in 1956. In this post I look at the history of the book…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE YEAR IN REVIEW (7): WITHDRAWING FROM ADMISSIONS (AND ANOTHER CHANCE TO PAY HOMAGE TO GUIDE DOG RALPH)
There have been relatively few cases about applications to withdraw from admissions this year. Interestingly most of them have been refusing applications to withdraw. However the main point of this post is to pay homage to Guide Dog Ralph, who…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE YEAR IN REVIEW (6): WHY WE STILL FRET OVER EXPERTS …
It is no surprise that there are numerous posts on experts this year. 26 years after the blast from the courts on the role of experts in the Ikerian Reefer [1993] 2 Lloyds Reports 68 there are still regular reports…
HIGH COURT ALLOWS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL FAILING A FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE ON TIME
In Badejo v Cranston [2019] EWHC 3343 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt overturned the decision of a Circuit Judge and granted relief from sanctions to a claimant who had failed to pay the trial fee in time. One issue related to…
“PLEADINGS ARE NOT A GAME OF LUDO”: TESCO REFUSED PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION
In SL Claimants v Tesco Plc [2019] EWHC 3312 (Ch) Mr Justice Hildyard refused an application by Tesco PLC to withdraw an admission. There is a detailed consideration of the factors to be considered when a party seeks permission to…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – THE YEAR IN REVIEW (4): FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY
There have been relatively few cases about fundamental dishonesty this year. However the cases that have been reported have all been interesting. The first involves a failing adverse to the defendant. The second highlights the point that there is no…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – THE YEAR IN REVIEW (2): SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM (AND ALLIED ISSUES)
The one “certainty” about writing about civil procedure is that every year there will be a few (often more than few)cases about service of the claim form. This is always a fruitful source of difficulty for claimants. The causes of…
PART 36: A SUCCESSFUL LITIGANT CAN BE BULLISH: CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER AND THERE WAS NOTHING UNJUST IN THE DEFENDANT PAYING THE PRICE
In Kivells Ltd v Torridge District Council [2019] EWHC 3210 (TCC) the claimant beat its own Part 36 offer (by a fair margin). HHJ Russen QC rejected the defendant’s argument that it would be unjust to apply the normal Part…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – THE YEAR IN REVIEW (1): BUNDLES
I am sorry to be starting the annual review of procedure so early, but December is a busy month and there is a lot to fit in. I’ll start with the subject that has constantly drawn the most readers to…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 73: THE AUTOMATIC STAY
CPR 15,11(2) provides for an automatic stay if nothing happens in an action for six months after service. This is a rule that can be overlooked. THE RULE CPR rule 15.11. Sub-paragraph (1) of that rule provides that: “Where…
CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – NOVEMBER 2019
Here we have links to blogs and articles about civil procedure and costs from November 2019. COSTS Costs Barrister Blaming others Costs Barrister The undiscovered country Herbert Smith Freehills Court of Appeal confirms jurisdiction to award claimant interim payment on account of costs…
WHY FAILING IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION CAN BE EXPENSIVE: (£1,015,722 – EXPENSIVE)
In BTI 2014 LLC v Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP & Anor [2019] EWHC 3219 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt considered the appropriate order for costs when a defendant failed in an application for summary judgment. The defendants were ordered to pay the costs…
WHEN WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: THIS RARELY TURNS OUT WELL: (WHEN THEY SIGN THE SAME STATEMENT, IT COULD BE WORSE…)
There has been a brief exchange on Twitter this morning. Someone has been served with a single witness statement – signed by three people. There are manifest breaches of the rules here. It is another example of a statement being…
IS A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT? WELL, IT DEPENDS… (& IT HAS CONSEQUENCES)
In Healys LLP v Partridge & Anor [2019] EWHC 2471 (Ch) Kelyn Bacon QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered the issue of whether a conditional fee agreement was a contentious business agreement. This has practical consequences in…
PROVING THINGS 169: WHEN THE DEFENDANT CALLS NO (LAY) EVIDENCE AND TRIES TO PROVE ITS CASE THROUGH THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESSES
There are a number of interesting aspects of the judgment of HHJ Coe in Esegbona v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (false imprisonment in hospital) [2019] EWHC 77 (QB). One of which is the defendant’s failure to call any…
THE SELF INFLICTED WOUNDS OF A “TRUSTED BRAND”/”CAPRICIOUS MID-VICTORIAN FACTORY-OWNER”: THE DANGERS OF PUTTING YOUR CASE TOO HIGH
The judgment of Lord Justice Coulson rejecting the Post Office’s application for permission to appeal is available on “Post Office Trial”, a case that has already been looked at several times on this blog. Here we have a critical appraisal…
LAWYERS: JUDGES SO WANT TO SEE ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE (AND TO BE TOLD ABOUT IT AS WELL…): MASTER’S POINT OF PRACTICE WORTH READING
There are some observations in the judgment of Master Thornett in Palizban v Protech (UK) Ltd [2019] EWHC 3090 (QB) that every litigator should read. It relates to the manner in which solicitors present witness statements, and documents, in interlocutory…
ANONYMOUS LITIGANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MILITATE AGAINST GRANTING THE CLAIMANT RELIEF”
In ABC v Google LLC [2019] EWHC 3020 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini refused an (anonymous) claimants application for relief from sanctions. The case has some unusual features, however it does highlight the point that a relief from sanctions application…
STAGE 3 PROCEEDINGS AND LATE SERVICE OF EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
The judgment of the Court of Appeal yesterday in Wickes Building Supplies Ltd v Blair [2019] EWCA Civ 1934 is an important one in relation to late service of evidence and Stage 3 of the Protocol. It shows the importance…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 70: OPINION EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS
There have been several recent cases in which the courts have emphasised the difference between knowledge and “opinion” in witness evidence. In Irani v Duchon [2019] EWCA Civ 1846 the Court of Appeal dismissed an argument that the defendant was…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 69 : SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE LITIGATOR: A RECAP
The earlier post on the judgment last Jet 2 Holidays Ltd v Hughes & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1858 was another case in which social media played a part. The defendant holiday company found social media entries which appeared inconsistent…
COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE BROUGHT IN RELATION TO PRE-ACTION WITNESS STATEMENTS: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE AMENDED TO ALLEGE FALSE STATEMENTS ARE MADE IN THE COURSE OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS
In Jet 2 Holidays Ltd v Hughes & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1858 the Court of Appeal held that committal proceedings can be brought in relation to allegedly false witness statements made and disclosed under the pre-action protocols. It is…
You must be logged in to post a comment.