COST BITES 358: WHAT DOES THE COURT DO IF THE PARTIES HAVE COMPROMISED AN APPLICATION BUT CANNOT AGREE ON WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS?
There are occasions where the parties agree the terms of an application but cannot agree who should pay the costs – the court is asked to adjudicate. There are difficulties for the judge in this situation. In particular judges are…
MAZUR MATTERS 51: WHY THE HEARING IS NOT BEING “LIVESTREAMED”: A QUICK WORD FOR THE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS
The appeal in the decision of Mazur -v- Charles Russell Speechlys LLP continues today. There were (I am told) some 400 people watching remotely. This has not stopped a large number of people online putting forward (sometimes bizarre) theories as to…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 58: THE DEFENDANTS’ PLEADING DID NOT CONTAIN AN “ADMISSION”: APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AMENDMENTS DISMISSED
This is a case where the court had to consider whether a defence had originally contained an “admission” such that the defendants required express permission to resile from it. The court found that, on close analysis, there was no such…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A WITNESS STATEMENT “MADE UP OF SUBMISSIONS OR COMMENTARY ON DOCUMENTS RATHER THAN EVIDENCE”
There are numerous warnings and strictures about not putting submissions, commentary and opinion in witness statements. More than one observer has commented that these rules are routinely ignored. We have examples of this here. We also have an example of…
COST BITES 359: FAILING TO SIGN CONSENT ORDER LEADS TO £44,000 IN COSTS: “GOING SILENT” IS NOT A CHEAP OPTION…
Just a quick warning here about the costs of not signing a consent order having agreed to so something. It can be expensive. We have a case here where it cost £44,000 when the claimant made an application because the…
COST BITES 358: JUDGE DOES NOT AWARD COSTS ON AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL BECAUSE THE RESPONDENT (INITIALLY) ASKED FOR TOO MUCH
It is not unusual for a party, on an interlocutory application, to put in a schedule of costs that covers the entire action. Sometimes this is justified, often it is not. Here we have a case where this backfired. The initial…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 57: A CASE ALLEGING PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE AGAINST A SOLICITOR WAS NOT ADEQUATELY PLEADED
We are looking at the same case as in the earlier post, but from a different angle. The case has some particular pleading points. The claimant pleaded that the solicitor was negligent in not instructing counsel, but did not plead that…
PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS: A SOLICITOR WAS NOT NEGLIGENT IN ADVISING THE CLAIMANT TO SETTLE: NEITHER COUNSEL’S ADVICE NOR AN EXPERT REPORT WERE NECESSARY
Fortunately for the courts and legal system most civil cases settle. Advising on settlement terms carries some risks, and requires a high level of judgment. Some clients will be dissatisfied with the settlement reached and blame the lawyers involved for…
MAZUR MATTERS 50: THE CALM BEFORE THE STORM: GETTING READY FOR THE APPEAL THIS AFTERNOON: BUT IF YOU WANT TO WATCH – YOU HAVE TO ASK…
The appeal in the decision of Mazur -v- Charles Russell Speechlys LLP begins at 2.00 today, it continues on Wednesday and Thursday. It is not being live streamed (To be fair I have been sent a link – the Court…
![PART 36 ISSUES: CAN A JUDGE CONSIDER INTEREST UNDER PART 36 WHEN INTEREST HAD BEEN AN ISSUE DETERMINED IN THE ACTION? [SPOILER - YES THEY CAN]](https://i0.wp.com/www.civillitigationbrief.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Par36Interest.png?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
PART 36 ISSUES: CAN A JUDGE CONSIDER INTEREST UNDER PART 36 WHEN INTEREST HAD BEEN AN ISSUE DETERMINED IN THE ACTION? [SPOILER – YES THEY CAN]
The judgment here considers an interesting point in relation to Part 36. The judge had, in the substantive judgment, considered issues relating to the interest to be paid by the defendant. The defendant had failed to beat a Part 36…
EXPERT WATCH 37: THE COURT SHOULD MAKE FINDINGS OF FACT FIRST AND NOT ABDICATE THIS TASK TO AN EXPERT: A FIRST INSTANCE DECISION WITH A “FUNDAMENTAL FLAW”
We are looking at a family law case which considers several significant aspects of expert evidence. Firstly it makes clear that it is not for an expert to make findings of fact. Further a judge cannot simply abdicate they key…
FATAL ACCIDENTS WEBINAR SERIES 2026: ADVANCE NOTICE : JUNE – JULY 2026: BASIC PRINCIPLES AND SOME INTERESTING NEW DEVELOPMENTS CONSIDERED
The recent High Court decision in Denning v Stone [2025] EWHC 3517 (KB) is a powerful reminder of the very particular nature of fatal accident damages. Although the deceased’s farm was not making a profit, the court awarded £377,577 to…
MEMBER NEWS: USEFUL LINKS: REMEMBER TO LOOK AT THE END OF THE POST: A REMINDER OF MEMBER DISCOUNTS
There have been developments on this site that readers should be aware of. Firstly the development of the “useful links” at the end of each post. Secondly the discount codes for webinars taking place over the next few weeks. …
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN WHEN A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SIGNS THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: A STARK REMINDER
There are major dangers when a lawyer signs a statement of truth on behalf of their client. I had actually planned a post on this issue before seeing the judgment last week which features below.. For many years this site…
COST BITES 357: DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER’S FEE? NOTE OF THE JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (AND THAT PERENNIAL ISSUE OF WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED…)
I am grateful to Ben Williams KC for sending me a note of the judgment yesterday which was the appeal against the decision in Santiago v Motor Insurers’ Bureau (The County Court at Central London, 22nd February 2025). The second time…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 56: SHOULD THE COURT STRIKE OUT THE ACTION WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAS PLEADED FALSE FACTS IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM ?
We are continuing to look at an unusual case in relation to pleadings. The claimant had pleaded false matters in the Particulars of Claim and admitted their falsity. The defendant applied to strike out the entire action. This judgment looks…
MORE DECISIONS ABOUT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND “HALLUCINATED” CASES: THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IS FAR FROM HAPPY: LEGAL PROFESSIONALS WHO DELEGATE THEIR WORK REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING ITS ACCURACY
As I’ve said before the hallucinated cases just keep on coming. The issues were considered by the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) here. There are important points about the need to supervise staff who undertake legal research. It is…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 55: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM CONTAINED A (SIGNIFICANTLY) FALSE FACT: JUDGE FINDS THAT THIS WAS PRINCIPALLY DUE TO THE FAULT OF “BARRISTER M”
It is rare for a judgment about pleadings to be “gripping” reading. We have such a case here. From the opening lines, to the detailed consideration of how the pleadings went wrong, the narrative is compelling. We even have an…
COST BITES 356: DO FIXED COSTS APPLY WHEN THE CASE IS TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM A FIXED COSTS REGIME TO ONE WHERE COSTS ARE “AT LARGE”
Here we are considering a Court of Appeal decision about what costs order should be made when an action is transferred from a fixed costs regime to one where costs are at large. On the face of it the decision…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: “STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR: SHARING THE PAIN” (FEBRUARY 2020) (WITH LINKS TO THE WHOLE SERIES)
In this series I always try to look at posts that remain relevant today. This post, indeed the series it was in from 2019 – 2020, clearly remain topical. The Law Society Gazette last week reported that a record number…
LIMITATION IN ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSE CASES: THE COURT DECLINED TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION UNDER S.33 “THE DELAY HAS ALREADY SIGNIFICANTLY UNDERMINED THE COGENCY OF THE EVIDENCE ABOUT WHETHER THE ABUSE TOOK PLACE AT ALL”
Here we have a case where the court refused to exercise its discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act in relation to allegations of sexual abuse that took place in the 1980s. As the judgment notes this is an…
SERVICE POINTS 28 : EFFECTIVE SERVICE ON A RESIDENCE IN ENGLAND COULD NOT TAKE PLACE WHEN THE DEFENDANT WAS IN FACT ABROAD – AND LEGALLY PREVENTED FROM RETURNING
We are looking at a Court of Appeal judgment today which overturned a finding that a defendant had been properly served at an address in England. The defendant was not living in England when proceedings were served and, indeed, there…
THE USE OF AI FOR PREPARING COURT DOCUMENTS: READ THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL INTERIM REPORT AND CONSULTATION
The Civil Justice Council has produced an interim report and consultation document on the use of AI for preparing Court documents. This is worthwhile reading. It summarises many of the current issues “Artificial intelligence (“AI”) has enormous potential to be…
PROVING THINGS 281:THE CCC CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT: LOSS OF EARNINGS AND CHILDREN: “THE COURT MUST ASSESS DAMAGES AS BEST IT CAN ON SUCH EVIDENCE AS IS REASONABLY AVAILABLE”
One of the things that the judgment in CCC -v- Sheffield has done is to highlight the issues relating to proving loss of earnings claims in relation to children. Indeed this difficulty in establishing such losses was a major issue…
CASE FAILED BECAUSE CLAIMANTS’ SOLICITORS ATTEMPTED TO ISSUE USING THE WRONG METHOD: THE DANGERS OF LEAVING THINGS TO THE LAST MINUTE
There are always profound dangers in leaving the issue of proceedings to the last minute. This case illustrates that danger. The claimants left it to days before the expiry of the limitation period before applying to issue. They used the…
COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWS APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT: THE APPELLANTS HAD NEVER BREACHED A PEREMPTORY ORDER: HOW “UNLESS ORDERS” SHOULD BE CONSTRUED
For the second time this month we are looking at a successful appeal against the construction of an “unless” order. In both cases the judges below had found that the appellants had breached the order. In both cases that finding…
LOST YEARS DAMAGES AND THE CHILD CLAIMANT: JUDGMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT TODAY
The judgment of the Supreme Court today considered whether “lost years” damages should be awarded to a young child. The Court, by a majority, allowed the claimant’s appeal and held that damages should be awarded in these circumstances. This post…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: EXPERT EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS (ALLOWED IN PART): ADVOCACY AND ARGUMENT – HAD TO GO
We are looking at a case where the sole issue the court was considering was the question of whether passages in the witness statements provided by the claimant were admissible. Unusually the Competition Appeal Tribunal allowed parts of the statements…
COST BITES 355: VARYING A BUDGET (3): PROPOSED VARIATIONS DISALLOWED BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT MADE “PROMPTLY”
This is the final part of today’s trilogy considering applications to vary costs budget. We have already seen that the judge determined that many issues in the case were “significant developments” which could, in theory, lead to a variation of…
COST BITES 354: VARYING A BUDGET (2) HOW WAS THE ISSUE OF “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS” CONSIDERED IN PRACTICE?
The previous post looked at the judge’s consideration of the principles relating to variations in a costs budget. Here we look at how this worked out in practice with the judge considering whether various issues amounted to “significant developments”. Some…
COST BITES 353: VARYING A COSTS BUDGETS (1): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED: WHAT IS MEANT BY “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS”?
We are taking a detailed look at a judgment that deals with proposals to vary costs budgets. This post will look at the judge’s considerations of the rules, principles and guidance that relates to variation of budgets. Later posts will…
EXPERT WATCH 36: THE JUDGE FINDS THAT EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “LITERALLY UNBELIEVABLE” (AND IT GETS WORSE…) “I MEAN, IT IS DISHONEST, FULL STOP”
We are used to seeing judicial criticism of experts on this site. We have an example here of a claimant’s case coming to grief because the judge did not accept her evidence or the evidence of the two experts called…
PART 36: RECENT CASES, KEY ISSUES AND KEY PROBLEMS CONSIDERED: WEBINAR 26th FEBRUARY 2026
A detailed working knowledge of Part 36 in practice is no longer optional for litigators. Recent decisions show the courts applying the rules with increasing rigour, exposing parties to serious and often unexpected costs consequences. This webinar cuts through…
SERVICE POINTS 27 : EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE CLAIM FORM SET ASIDE: FAILURES IN THE DUTY TO GIVE FULL DISCLOSURE PLAY A MAJOR PART
We have got to the middle of February and this is (I think) the first case about failures of service of the claim form this year. This case has a history we have seen a lot on this site. The…
COST BITES 352: S.106 OF THE PATENTS ACT HAS NO IMPACT UPON THE COURT’S DECISIONS IN RELATION TO COSTS BUDGETING
There are several interesting issues raised in this judgment. The fundamental point is whether the costs budgeting exercise is an “award of costs or expenses”. The judge decided that it is not. This, in turn, had an impact upon whether…
PROVING THINGS 280: DEFENDANT FAILS TO PROVE THAT AN ACTION HAD BEEN COMPROMISED: THE TERMS “SUBJECT TO CONTRACT” MEAN THAT ACCEPTANCE DID NOT GIVE RISE TO A BINDING COMPROMISE
Documents are often marked “subject to contract”. This case considers the practical implications of such markings. In particular whether an apparent acceptance of an agreement gave rise to a binding agreement. As we shall see the wording was found to…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION (2): CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE NICE PEOPLE OF TWITTER:
I am here summarising the Advice given by lawyers on the social media site formerly known as Twitter. In April 2019 I asked lawyers what their advice would be for their colleagues in the profession when things go wrong. Specifically…
PRACTICE DIRECTION AMENDMENTS: 193rd UPDATE: CHANGES TO RULES ABOUT DISCLOSURE IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS: THE COURT CAN ORDER A PARTY TO SEEK INSPECTION FROM “ANY PERSON”
There are several amendments in Practice Directions made in the the most recent update. Here we look at one that is directly related to the rule change we looked at last week. The amendment introduces into the Business and Property…
COST BITES 351: WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE COSTS BUDGETS IN PRACTICE? “COMPARE AND MATCH” IS NOT ALWAYS AN ACCURATE GUIDE:THE KEY QUESTION IS – WHO WILL BE DOING THE MOST WORK?
The previous post looked at the judge’s general observations in this case. Here we look how those principles were applied in practice. It is clear that the arguments that the costs were excessive by way of comparison did not always…
COST BITES 350: KNOWING HOW JUDGES APPROACH BUDGETING WHEN ONE SIDE SEEKS MUCH MORE THAN ANOTHER: IS THE COURT A “SLAVE TO COMPARISON”?
It is always important, and enlightening, to have a close look at judicial observations on the nature of costs budgeting. We have a useful judgment here. The judge considered the applicable principles and guidance before carrying out budgeting in a…
PROVING THINGS 279: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO FIND IMPECUNIOSITY EVEN THOUGH THERE HAD BEEN OMISSIONS IN DISCLOSURE
Credit hire litigation has given rise to a number of reported cases over the years. It gives rise to particular issues of procedure and evidence. In particular the need for a claimant to establish “impecuniosity” in order to justify the…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DATE OF RECEIPT AT COURT FOR LIMITATION PURPOSES AND DATE OF ISSUE FOR THE PURPOSES OF SERVICE: AVOID TESTING THIS DISTINCTION IF YOU CAN
Here we look at an issue that can cause confusion, it is important from the point of view of determining the date from which the date of service runs. The relevant date for limitation purposes is the date of receipt…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 11: THE LOCAL AUTHORITY COULD NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PERSONAL INJURY TRUSTS AND REFUSE TO PROVIDE CARE
Here was have a case where the local authority ceased providing funds for a seriously injured person, indeed they demanded money back. The local authority contended that money in a personal injury trust should properly be taken into account. Further…
COST BITES 349 : THE CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED 100% OF THEIR COSTS: THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL WAS A HIGHLY RELEVANT FACTOR
It is rare for the Court of Appeal to overturn a first instance decision as to costs. We see an example of this happening here. The Upper Tribunal awarded the claimant 75% of his costs of a judicial review application…
PART 36: LIABILITY ONLY OFFERS AND THE COURT OF APPEAL: WE DON’T HAVE CLARITY AND CERTAINTY WE DO HAVE CONFUSION AND AMBIGUITY
Those with long memories will recall the confusion and uncertainty that the Court of Appeal caused in Carver v BAA Plc [2008] EWCA Civ 412 when the concept of a “near miss” was introduced in relation to Part 36. A…
COST BITES 348 : A PARTY SEEKING SECURITY FOR COSTS SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED TIME SPENT IN SETTLEMENT AND ADR
There is an interesting comment at the end of the judgment. The judge made an order for security for costs. However he also expressed concern that the defendant’s estimated costs did not include anything in relation to the costs of…
EXPERT WATCH 35: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO ADDUCE A SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT AFTER THE TRIAL HAD ENDED
There are many (if not all) working advocates who have thought, after a hearing is over, “I could have said that”. The same may well be true of experts. Here we have an attempt to introduce new material in a…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: “EXPERTS: THE JOINT REPORT AND THOSE TROUBLESOME “AGENDAS”: FEBRUARY 2018
There have been several major issues about the way in which the joint meetings of experts are conducted. This includes the problems that occur when the parties cannot even agree on an agenda for the meeting. This post looked at…
MEMBER NEWS: A REMINDER OF MEMBER BENEFITS AND WHERE TO FIND THE DISCOUNT CODES: ESSENTIAL TOPICS COVERED IN WEBINARS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR
A reminder that member subscribers have access to discounts on webinars being presented throughout the year. The details of the webinars, the discounts and how to find the discount codes are below. The first webinar sets out the practical consequences…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 54: ALTHOUGH THE PARTICULARS WOULD NOT BE STRUCK OUT SOME WORDS NEED TO BE CHANGED: CHOOSE YOUR WORDS WITH CARE…
We are returning to look at the case where the Master refused to strike out pleadings on the grounds that they were an abuse of process. However it was also made clear that the use of certain words in the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.