CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2017 (I): “SURVIVING THE EMOTIONS OF LITIGATION” & “THINGS THAT IRRITATE JUDGES”
This is the fourth annual review on this blog. This year I have decided to break it into a number of reviews. First it is interesting to look at what is being read on this site and the search terms…
CIVIL LITIGATION AND THE MARTIAL ARTS: MCGANN -V- BISPING: ROUND 3: LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND “IMPLICIT” ORDERS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS
We have already looked twice at the “sparring” arguments in relation to procedure in the case of McGann v Bisping [2017] EWHC 2951 (Comm). A further procedural issue arose as to whether a party was debarred from calling evidence at all. The…
THE COSTS OF PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THE CAP ALWAYS FITS
In W Portsmouth and Company Ltd v Lowin [2017] EWCA Civ 2172 the Court of Appeal held that the cap on the costs of provisional assessment continues to apply even when a receiving party has beaten their own Part 36 offer…
CIVIL LITIGATION AND THE MARTIAL ARTS: McGANN -v- BISPING: ROUND 1: DISPUTING THE AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS WITHOUT SERVICE OF A NOTICE UNDER CPR 32.19
The judgment today in McGann v Bisping [2017] EWHC 2951 (Comm) involves multiple issues in relation to civil evidence, procedure and witness credibility. Here I want to look at just one issue – the failure to serve a notice under CPR…
COUNTY COURT HAS POWER TO SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL – IF IT WAS OBTAINED BY FRAUD
The decision in Salekipour & Anor v Parmar [2017] EWCA Civ 2141 was made after three previous hearings a (including two appeal hearings) in the lower courts. It was the only time the claimants were successful. It involved an important procedural…
COURT OF APPEAL STATES INDEMNITY COSTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARDED: SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE BULLISH IN BRADFORD…
It is unusual for the Court of Appeal to interfere with a discretionary order in relation to costs. It is even more unusual for the court to replace an order for costs on the standard basis with indemnity costs. This…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT ISSUES IN BREACH OF CIVIL RESTRAINT ORDER
In Couper v Irwin Mitchell LLP & Ors [2017] EWHC 3231 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold refused the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions when the claimant had issued proceedings in breach of a civil restraint order. The claimant, however, was given…
ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS DEPLOYED IN COURT: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION
The judgment of Master McCloud in Dring v Cape Distribution Ltd & Anor (Constitution – access to courts – open justice) [2017] EWHC 3154 (QB) considers the issue of whether the public should have access to documents disclosed during the course…
HOT TUBBING OF EXPERTS: NEW PRACTICE DIRECTION
The 93rd Update on Practice Direction Amendments also introduced a change in the rules as to concurrent evidence from experts. This gives the trial judge a considerable degree of flexibility about the way in which expert evidence is heard. These rules came…
CLAIMANT ACCEPTING PART 36 OFFER LATE: COURT ORDERED INDEMNITY COSTS FOR THE PERIOD BETWEEN EXPIRY AND ACCEPTANCE
In Lokhova v Longmuir [2017] EWHC 3152 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered the court’s discretion when a claimant accepted a defendant’s Part 36 offer late. KEY POINTS A court had jurisdiction to vary the normal order for costs when a claimant…
WITNESSES WHO ARGUE THE CASE AND EXPERTS WHO ACT AS ADVOCATES: THIS IS NOT GOING TO HELP …
In British Telecommunications Plc v Office Of Communications [2017] CAT 25 the Competition Appeal Tribunal commented on two of the central evidential issues of much commercial litigation: witnesses who give much commentary and “argue” the case; experts who act as advocates. …
CLAIMANT BEATS HIS OWN PART 36 OFFER: INTERESTS, COSTS AND HOW THE ADDITIONAL 10% IS CALCULATED
In Mohammed v The Home Office [2017] EWHC 3051 (QB) Mr Edward Peperall QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered the appropriate award for interest and additional damages when a claimant had beaten their own Part 36 offer. …
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW, SERIES 2 PART 5: REMEMBER JUDGES MAY BE TALKING ABOUT YOU: ADVICE FROM THE STREETS OF SAN FRANCISCO
Here we look at an interview with San Francisco Superior Court Judge, Curtis Karnow. The interview was about a book the judge had written “Litigation in Practice”, which is available in the UK. The original interview by is Ros Todd….
WITNESS CREDIBILITY, VERY BAD SINGING AND A MOVIE: ALL HUMAN LIFE IS HERE: (SOMETHING FOR LAWYERS TOO…)
The decision in Martin & Anor v Kogan & Ors [2017] EWHC 2927 (IPEC) centred on witness credibility. Not so much honesty but accuracy of recollection. It illustrates the issue of how the judge goes about assessing evidence when witnesses…
PROVING THINGS 76: A RECAP – I DIDN’T EXPECT TO GET THIS FAR…
Today saw the 75th in the series “proving things”. I never anticipated that the series would run so long, I initially planned around 10 posts. Now we have reached 75 (and with no plans to stop) this is an appropriate…
THE HIPPOCRATIC OATH AND LEGAL HYPOCRISY: WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM DOCTORS?
Lawyers, particularly litigators, are infinitely wise. This is because we specialise in hindsight: “Why didn’t you do that?” ; “You should have done that”; “Why wasn’t that written down?” This is particularly acute in clinical negligence cases where one profession…
PRO BONO COSTS ORDERS: NOT JUST FOR CHRISTMAS
I had an email this morning from Sue Nash asking me to publicise the ability of the court to make pro bono costs orders. Here is a reminder. It is important that those representing a party pro bono is aware…
PROVING THINGS 73: FORESEEABILITY: NOT A TEST SET IN STONE BUT A MATTER OF COMMONSENSE
Foreseeability of damages is one of those topics that takes up a lot of space in text books but is rarely an issue in practice. The question of foreseeability of damages did, however, form a part of the judgment we…
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW, SERIES 2 PART 3: SKELETON ARGUMENTS, PREPARATION AND PRESENTATION: AN ABSOLUTE GOLDMINE
This blog has many posts that record cases where judges have been critical of the contents (and usually length) of skeleton arguments. A remedy for most of these issues has been available since 2004. Gray’s Inn prepared a paper “Skeleton…
SORRY SILKS: IMPORTANT AS YOU ARE THE CASE IS NOT BEING HELD UP FOR YOU: THE TAIL IS NOT GOING TO WAG THE DOG
The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd [2017] EWHC 2844 (QB) contains some telling observations about case management, listing and the need to comply with the overriding objective. “Fitting hearings around [counsel’s] availability has…
SUING THE WRONG DEFENDANT? SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS?
It is always embarrassing to find out you are suing the wrong defendant and have to apply for substitution (although we have looked at cases in which the wrong claimant has issued proceedings). This issue was considered by Mr Justice…
PROVING THINGS 72: THE BARRISTER’S LAMENT: BUNDLES WHEN THE CLAIMANT DOES THE DEFENDANT’S JOB FOR THEM
Much has been written on this blog about the preparation of bundles. Some bundles are prepared on the basis that every single disclosed document should be included. In doing so many claimants are causing harm to their own case. Disclosed…
BE WARY OF THE AUTOMATIC STAY – IF YOU SERVE AND DO NOTHING
CPR 15,11(2) provides for an automatic stay. The judgment in Citicorp Trustee Company Ltd & Anor v Al-Sanea & Anor [2017] EWHC 2845 (Comm) shows that it is normally not difficult to lift that stay. The key point is to know…
WHO WAS TELLING THE TRUTH? BOUDICCA, POSSESSORY TITLE AND THE JUDGE’S ROLE AS FACT FINDER: “DETERMINED COMPETITORS IN AN IMPLAUSIBILITY CONTEST”
In McClelland v Elvin & Ors [2017] EWHC 2795 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered an appeal where the trial judge had found against a party claiming adverse possession. There are some interesting observations in relation to Roman Britain, grounds of…
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW: SERIES 2, PART 2: BEING PERSUASIVE: “CONVOLUTED ARGUMENTS ARE SLEEPING PILLS ON PAPER”
The second post in this series takes us to Washington. A detailed article by Judge Stephen J. Dwyer, Leonard J. Feldman & Ryan P. McBridet called “How to Write, Edit, and Review Persuasive Briefs: Seven Guidelines from One Judge and Two…
WIKIPEDIA IN THE COURTS (SO FAR): MUSIC, BREWERIES, CANALS, DOG WHISTLE POLITICS AND GETTING TO THE HEART OF THE MATTER: SOME QUESTIONS TO BE ASKED
I have had to apologise in the past for taking small parts of a judicial judgment and scrutinising them closely in relation to matters of procedure or evidence. This apology is particularly apposite in relation to the judgment in Oldham Metropolitan…
FONTS, LAWYERS AND THE RULES: NEVER, EVER USE COMIC SANS
There was a recent discussion on Twitter about the appropriate fonts for lawyers to use. At times it was a heated discussion. This led me to look at the rules and guidance as to the use of fonts in litigation,…
PRACTISING “DEFENSIVE LITIGATION” : ESSENTIAL CHECKLISTS GATHERED TOGETHER
What many (if not most) of the posts on this blog make clear is that there is now precious little room for error in civil procedure. To operate effectively, and profitably, we have to develop systems of “defensive litigation”. That…
MYTHS ABOUT PROCEDURE: THE DATE FOR SERVICE IS NOT CALCULATED FROM THE DAY THE COURT RECEIVES THE CLAIM FORM: IT IS CALCULATED FROM THE DATE OF “ISSUE”
In an earlier post on limitation myths I recounted how I often received phone calls from worried solicitors who feared they had missed a limitation period. The papers had been received by the court within the period, the date of…
ANOTHER SORRY TALE – FORGING SIGNATURES ON WITNESS STATEMENTS: A “PRECEDENT” WITNESS STATEMENT CAN RARELY BE A GOOD THING
The Law Society Gazette carries an account of a solicitor struck off for “forging” the signature on witness statements. I want to concentrate on the way that the witness statements themselves were produced. This was not dishonest but is worrying….
BEING A WITNESS IN COURT: “AVOIDING HUMILIATION”: USEFUL LINKS (VIDEOS TOO)
This idea for this post comes from another blog. Pink Tape has a recent post giving parents tips on giving evidence in court. This caused me to look at the assistance available generally. This is one part of the legal…
HALLOWEEN FOR LITIGATORS: WHAT KEEPS LAWYERS AWAKE AT NIGHT? DEADLINES, SKELETONS, IMPOSTER SYNDROME & DEFENDANTS RISING FROM THE DEAD
I am not a great fan of Halloween. However when Jenna Kisala suggested there should be a post on “Halloween for Litigators”. I couldn’t resist the challenge. I then promptly delegated the task to Twitter. Here are the tweets so…
WHEN THE PLEADINGS SHOULD NOT NAME SOMEONE: HIGH COURT OBSERVATIONS
In Huda v Wells & Ors [2017] EWHC 2553 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin made some observations that make it clear that it may be prudent for statements of case not to name vulnerable individuals. THE CASE The defendants set aside an…
MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 2: THE LIMITATION PERIOD FOR ASSAULT IS SIX YEARS
This is a myth I didn’t know existed until I heard it being propounded in a bar last week (and which led to the start of this series). Strangely, unlike some of the myths were are looking at, it has…
STRIKING OUT THE CLAIM FOR NON-PAYMENT OF TRIAL FEE: THIS IS ALWAYS A POINT TO WATCH
In April this year the rules were amended to introduce a concept of “automatic striking out”. Put simply if a claimant does not pay the court fee by the relevant date. I have seen occasions where this has had effect….
CAPACITY TO LITIGATE : LITIGATION FRIEND CAN PROPERLY CONTINUE WITH ACTION WHERE CLAIMANT WAS WITHOUT CAPACITY AT BEGINNING OF CASE
I was speaking at the MASS conference yesterday about capacity and litigation. It is always the way of things that an interesting point on an issue comes up the day after a presentation. An issue on capacity to litigate arose…
COST BUDGET SERVED TWO MONTHS LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED: DELAY DOES NOT ALWAYS GIVE RISE TO A SIGNIFICANT BREACH
I am grateful to my colleague Colin Richmond for sending me a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Gosnell In Hewitt -v- Smith (Bradford County Court 16th June 2017) relating to a successful appeal from a refusal to…
THE CIVIL STANDARD OF PROOF AND ALLEGATIONS OF DISHONESTY: AVOIDING HINDSIGHT
In Group Seven Ltd & Anor v Nasir & Ors [2017] EWHC 2466 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan considered issues relating to the standard of proof when there are allegations of dishonesty and fraud. Part of the judgment also deals with the…
ACCEPTING A PART 36 OFFER DURING A TRIAL: A MATTER OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION: CLAIMANTS HAD LOST THEIR CHANCE
I am grateful to barrister Simon Mills for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Morgan in Houghton (Stanley) -v- P.B. Donaghue (Haulage & Plant Hire Ltd & Ors) 2017] EWHC 1738 (Ch). It relates to the question…
PROPORTIONALITY – A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE V – A ROUND UP: 12 KEY POINTS TO TAKE YOU INTO OCTOBER (AND BEYOND)
The issue of “proportionality” is central to contemporary litigation. However it is rarely examined in detail and rarely discussed. Attempts to analyse how proportionality can be achieved are even rarer. For the fifth in this (slow burning) series I review…
THE INHERENT JURISDICTION OF THE COURT: FAMILY COURT HAS ALL THE POWERS OF THE HIGH COURT
In a short judgment today in CH v WH [2017] EWHC 2379 (Fam) Mr Justice Mostyn made pointed observations in relation to the innate jurisdiction of the High Court. “The Family Court has all the powers of the High Court.” THE…
“MULTIPLE SERIOUS ERRORS” IN JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING : THE UPPER TRIBUNAL DECISION IN FULL
The case of AA069062014 & Ors. [2017] UKAITUR AA069062014 has already attracted considerable attention on social media and beyond. The Upper Tribunal (Immigration & Asylum Chamber) considered appeals in 14 cases. The major issue was the tribunal judge. Here are the…
GOODBYE TO THE SOLICITORS JOURNAL: PERSONAL MEMORIES:
The Solicitors Journal has published its last edition after 160 years. I was a SJ columnist for around 10% of that time. It brings back some memories. “The reality of the alleged want of a journal which shall distinctively represent…
NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS: THE FULL JUDGMENT IN POWELL -v- WATFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL
I have written before about the judgment of Mr Justice Jay in Powell -v- Watford Borough Council [2017] EWHC 2283 (QB). The full transcript has now become available. It deals with an important point about the need to follow the…
THE NEW PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL FOR DEBT CLAIMS: LINKS AND COMMENTARY
A new Pre-Action Protocol for debt claims comes into force on the 1st October 2017. Here are links to the Protocol itself and commentary on the Protocol. THE PROTOCOL The protocol itself is available in full here ARTICLES AND COMMENTARY…
ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE: PUTTING IN THE POST ON REQUISITE DATE IS GOOD SERVICE: NO SAFE HARBOUR FOR DEFENDANTS ON THIS ISSUE
Master McCloud has already made observations about the ” dry and unlovely crop of procedural service issues” that are regularly coming before the Masters. Another issue was considered in Jones v Chichester Harbour Conservancy & Ors [2017] EWHC 2270. “… the correct…
CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFERS AND LATE ACCEPTANCE: SOME JUDGES WILL, SOME JUDGES WON’T…
There have been numerous cases which have considered the appropriate approach of the courts when there is late acceptance by a defendant of a claimant’s Part 36 offer. Some of these have been considered on this blog, but by…
FACT FINDING FOR LAWYERS : HOLIDAY CLAIMS: SRA GUIDANCE – NOT A WALK ON THE BEACH
The Solicitors Regulation Authority has issued a specific warning notice in relation to holiday sickness claims. The notice, issued on the 6th September 2017, contains important guidance in relation to the role of the solicitor in investigating facts. The guidance…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS FOLLOWING BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER: APPLICATION REFUSED: A WORKING HOLIDAY IS NO EXCUSE
In The Financial Conduct Authority v Da Vinci Invest Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 2220 (Ch) Mr Justice Snowden rejected a defendant’s application for relief from sanctions for breach of a peremptory order. It is unusual in that the court considered…
WITNESSES, STATEMENTS AND LAWYERS – “SELF PROTECTION”: A QUICK RECAP
Sometimes, quite often in fact, clients need “protecting” from lawyers who are preparing witness statements on their behalf. I have dealt with this in previous posts and will write on this again in the near future. However here I want…
You must be logged in to post a comment.