NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE: PLEADING SPECIFIC ISSUES IN RELATION TO THE HIRE OF A REPLACEMENT VEHICLE
The 113th update to Practice Direction Amendments comes into force on the 6th April 2020. It introduces new, and quite specific, obligations on a claimant claiming the cost of a replacement hire vehicle. THE NEW RULE There is a new Paragraph…
BOOK REVIEW: GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS
I have been sent a copy of the 3rd edition of the Guide to Catastrophic Injury Claims by Stuart McKechnie QC and others. I can review it briefly. This is a book that needs to be on your shelf if…
PROVING THINGS 174: ILLEGALITY, THE VAN DRIVER AND THE MOT CERTIFICATE: CLAIMANT STILL ENTITLED TO DAMAGES
I am grateful to Liam Davidson, from Winns Solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Freedman in Jack -v- Borys (Newcastle upon Tyne 20th December 2019). It relates to damages and illegality. Jack-v-Borys-2019 (1) “I think…
PROVING THINGS 173: FAILING TO PROVE ANY KIND OF PAST OR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS: A BLAMIRE AWARD IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR EVIDENCE
There is another aspect of the judgment of Mr Justice Chamberlain in BXB v Watch Tower And Bible Tract Society of Pennsylvannia & Anor [2020] EWHC 156 (QB) that merits attention. Th claimant sought damage for loss of earnings but these…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: THE AWARD SHOULD BE THE SAME: IT DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE RICH OR POOR
The Privy Council decision in Attorney General of St Helena v AB & Ors (St Helena) [2020] UKPC 1 is of considerable interest to personal injury practitioners. Issues relating to awards made for pain and suffering are rarely discussed at…
63 YEARS OLD AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES – MUNKMAN (& EXALL) ON DAMAGES – THE WRITING PROCESS
An earlier post looked at the previous 13 editions of Munkman on Damages for Personal Injury and Death, together with photos. Since more people read law books than write them I thought it would be of interest to describe the…
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…
APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT’S UPHILL STRUGGLE
The second aspect of the judgment in Essex County Council & Ors v Davies & Ors [2019] EWHC 3443 I want to look at is the defendants’ appeal in relation to damages. This case reiterates the difficulties (for claimants and defendants)…
PROVING THINGS 168: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION:STATEMENTS OF OPINION OR BELIEF CARRY NO WEIGHT
The Court of Appeal judgment today in Irani v Duchon [2019] EWCA Civ 1846 adds to the Proving Things series in relation to a failure to establish key matters at trial (it also gives me an opportunity to promote the…
THE RIDICULOUS RULES ABOUT PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: DOES THE RULES COMMITTEE JUST NOT LISTEN (OR JUST NOT CARE)?
The previous post in this case on the judgment in Pepe’s Piri Piri Ltd & Anor v Muhammad Ali Junaid Food Trends Ltd (Now Dissolved) & Ors[2019] EWHC 2769 (QB) highlights the problems posed by one of the most ridiculous rules…
FATAL ACCIDENTS: LAW, PRACTICE, PROCEDURE & COMPASSION: COURSES IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER 2019
Alongside solicitor and partner in Irwin Mitchell Hilary Wetherell I am speaking at the APIL day-long courses on fatal accidents in November and December this year, in London, Manchester and Bristol. Our emphasis is on practical knowledge and application of…
COUNTER-SCHEDULES: WORDS OF WISDOM FROM TWITTER
Twitter this afternoon gave rise to a number of interesting discussions about the role of the counter-schedule. I got permission to share some of the contributions. THE START It started with Sarah Pritchard QC looking for ideas for a talk…
PROVING THINGS 164: THE NEED FOR A CAR FOR PRIVATE PURPOSES IS NOT SELF PROVING AND THE COURT WILL NOT INFER SUCH A NEED.
In Hussain v EUI Ltd [2019] EWHC 2647 (QB) Mr Justice Pepperall dismissed a claimant’s appeal in relation to the assessment of damages. “Need for social and domestic purposes is not self-proving and, in this case, cannot simply be inferred”…
PROVING THINGS 163: PROVING MITIGATION OF LOSS: A CLAIMANT NEED NOT TAKE THE RISK OF STARTING UNCERTAIN LITIGATION AGAINST A THIRD PARTY
The need for a defendant to prove a failure to mitigate is something that has been covered before on this blog. In Natixis SA v Marex Financial & Ors [2019] EWHC 2549 (Comm) Mr Justice Bryan considered the legal principles. …
CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES: WHY JUDGES GO “BACK TO BASICS”: A REMINDER FOR LITIGATORS
This is the first of a series of posts designed (to be frank) to remind people that the next edition of “Damages for Personal Injury and Death” will be published later this year. One interesting aspect of writing a book,…
WEBINARS: (1) LOSS OF EARNINGS (2) COURT FEES – AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: TWO PLUGS
Just a brief reminder of two webinars this month: one on loss of earnings, the other on court fees and associated issues. CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS This webinar “Claims for loss of earnings: law, procedure and evidence, prove it…
THE CHANGE IN THE DISCOUNT RATE: LINKS TO THE NEW SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
The change in the discount rate has led to the Government Actuary’s Department producing supplementary tables which include the – 0.25% rate. The relevant page can be found here. LINKS TO THE TABLES Actuarial tables for use in personal…
PROVING THINGS 158: NOW – WHY WOULDN’T BANKS WANT TO REVEAL DETAILS OF THE BONUSES THEY PAID?
The judgment in Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) Ltd & Ors v HM Revenue and Customs [2019] EWHC 1922 (Ch) demonstrates a strange position on the part of the claimant bank. The claimant banks did not adduce any evidence to prove…
CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LAW, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE: PROVE IT OR LOSE IT: WEBINAR 10th SEPTEMBER 2019
I am giving a webinar on the 10th September 2019: “CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LAW, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE: PROVE IT OR LOSE IT!” CONTENT The webinar will cover: The law as to loss of earnings How a claim for…
ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR (1): READ THIS CASE: BE WARY OF OPENING YOUR MOUTH TOO WIDE: TURN DOWN £1.5 MILLION AND GET £2.00 INSTEAD
A member of my family qualifies as a solicitor tomorrow and starts working in litigation. I have been pondering the best advice to give a newly qualified litigation solicitor. I intended a recap post of all those cases where litigants…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 54: SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES SHOULD NOT BE WORKS OF FICTION
Anyone drafting anything in the litigation process must remain acutely aware that there is real possibility that the document they are drafting will one day be read by a judge. This is even more likely in relation to a schedule…
DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON “SPECIALIST” EVIDENCE AS TO LIFE EXPECTANCY: THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH SUCH EVIDENCE IS ALLOWED AND CONSIDERED
In Dodds v Arif & Anor [2019] EWHC 1512 (QB) Master Davison refused the defendant’s application to rely on a specialist report in relation to the claimant’s life expectancy. The judgment also contains an important summary of the circumstances in…
PROVING THINGS 151: DEPENDENCY IN A FATAL ACCIDENT ACT CLAIM: ADULT CHILD DEPENDANTS RECEIVE DAMAGES FOR FUTURE CONTRIBUTIONS TO WEDDINGS AND TOWARDS THEIR FIRST HOME
In AB v KL [2019] EWHC 611 (QB) David Edwards QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered the nature of the evidence needed to establish damages under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976. It is also important both…
FATAL ACCIDENTS: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO BEREAVEMENT PAYMENTS : ADVANCE NOTICE FOR LECTURES LATER IN THE YEAR (AND A NEW EDITION OF A BOOK…)
The government is, at long last, putting forward a draft remedial order to amend Section 1A of the Fatal Accidents Act 1976. This would allow cohabitees, who have been living together for more than two years, to recover the statutory…
PROVING THINGS 147: CLAIM FOR NOT PURSUING NEGLIGENT SOLICITORS LEADS TO NOMINAL DAMAGES ONLY: NO DAMAGES FOR “LOSS OF CHANCE”
The judgment in Waraich & Anor v Ansari Solicitors (A firm) [2019] EWHC 1038 (Comm) HHJ Pearce also contains yet another example of claimants failing to prove any loss at trial. There was no evidence to support any claim for…
WHEN AN EXPERT RELIES ON MATTERS FROM THE INTERNET FOR MATTERS OUTSIDE THEIR EXPERTISE THEN YOUR CASE IS LIKELY TO FALL APART: THE CIDER HOUSE RULES
I am returning to the decision of HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Devon Commercial Property Ltd v Barnett & Anor [2019] EWHC 700 (Ch). Here was are looking at the judge’s view of one of the experts….
PROVING THINGS 146: NO EVIDENCE AT ALL TO PROVE A LOSS, OR THAT THE DEFENDANT CAUSED ANY “LOSS” (THIS IS BECOMING A FAMILIAR STORY)
The number of people who are willing to commit to large scale, and expensive, litigation without having the basic evidence to prove their case on damages has proven to be a staple fare for this series. Another example is the…
WHAT’S IN A NAME? “PAYOUTS”, “WINS” AND THE SERIOUSLY INJURED CLAIMANT
As lawyers we know, or should know, the dangers of putting pejorative labels on things. In litigation we are fortunate in that an attempt to label parties, or issues, pejoratively, often backfires. However we often see the pejorative labelling of…
PERMISSION TO AMEND GIVEN TO PLEAD COSTS PAID IN PREVIOUS ACTION AS DAMAGES: GAMBLING ON GETTING A SECOND CHANCE
In Playboy Club London Ltd v Banca Nazionale Del Lavora SPA [2019] EWHC 303 (Comm) the High Court granted the claimant permission to amend to include, as a claim for damages, the costs of a previous action. “I have come to…
EXAGGERATION IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WHEN THE DEFENDANT DIGS A BIG EVIDENTIAL HOLE FOR ITSELF
The judgment of HHJ Hampton in Smith -v- Ashwell Maintenance Limited (Leicester County Court 21/01/2019) is available through a Linked In post provided by barrister Andrew Mckie. It provides a number of lessons for those collecting evidence. In a case where…
PROVING THINGS 141: CREDIBILITY WAS IMPORTANT IN CLAIM FOR DAMAGES AGAINST SOLICITORS: SUPREME COURT RESTORES DECISION OF TRIAL JUDGE
In Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2019] UKSC 5 the Supreme Court restored the decision of the trial judge in relation to damages. One of the key issues was whether the Court of Appeal was correct to overturn the trial judge’s factual…
CLAIMANTS IN A FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIM HAVE NOT “WON” ANYTHING: SETTLEMENT OF ACTION APPROVED: DETAILS KEPT CONFIDENTIAL
In Correa & Ors v BP Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 232 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip approved damages in a fatal accident case. The judgment provides a great deal of anonymity but gives a real indication of the difficulties involved. “The…
PERIODICAL PAYMENTS, ASBESTOS CASES AND THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: AMBUSH IS TO BE AVOIDED
In the judgment today in Howard v The Imperial London Hotels Ltd [2019] EWHC 202 (QB) Master Thornett had to consider whether periodical payments were suitable for someone with a very short life expectancy. The judgment is a careful and sensitive…
PROVING THINGS 140: SPECULATIVE EVIDENCE NOT ENOUGH TO PROVE A “LOSS OF CHANCE”
In Dymoke v Association for Dance Movement Pyschotherapy UK Ltd [2019] EWHC 94 (QB) Mr Justice Popplewell found that a claimant had not adduced sufficient evidence to prove a “loss of chance” in a claim for damages. This shows that a…
DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE REFUSED: AN ORDER WOULD NOT SAVE COSTS OR ASSIST THE DISPUTE TO BE RESOLVED WITHOUT PROCEEDINGS
In Lacey v Leonard [2018] EWHC 3528 (QB) Mrs Justice Slade DBE upheld a decision refusing the defendant’s application for pre-action disclosure. The primary ground for refusal was that disclosure of medical records, and various documents relating to employment, would not…
CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2018 2: CASE OF THE YEAR: HOW WINNING ON A PRELIMINARY ISSUE CAN LEAD YOU UP THE GARDEN PATH
There are no objective criteria for selecting case of the year. This year I have chosen Burges & Anor v Lejonvarn [2018] EWHC 3166 (TCC). This case is a classic illustration of a basic failure to prove things. It is of central…
PROVING THINGS 134: WINNING A FEW BATTLES BUT LOSING THE WAR: ALL IS NOT ROSY IN THESE CLAIMANTS’ GARDEN
Law students have probably already been taught, and will be lectured for generations to come, about the implications of the Court of Appeal decision in Lejonvarn v Burgess & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 254. If any of those law students plan…
PROVING THINGS 130: BY THE TIME OF TRIAL YOU SHOULD REALLY KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE LOST: SOME OF THESE CLAIMANTS MAY HAVE SUFFERED NO LOSS AT ALL
The final paragraphs of the judgment in Anderson & Ors v Sense Network Ltd [2018] EWHC 2834 shows that some of the claimants in that case were unable to establish their losses. Indeed two of the claimants may have suffered no…
SUCCESSFUL PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION BY DEFENDANTS: CLAIMANTS HAD TO GIVE INFORMATION AS TO IMPECUNIOSITY
In EUI Ltd v Charles & Ors [2018] EW Misc B7 (CC) HHJ Robert Harrison made an order that claimants give pre-action disclosure of documents relevant to the issue of impecuniosity. The practical consequences of this decision could be enormous. Given…
A POSSIBLE SOLUTION WHEN A DEFENDANT IN A PI CASE WILL NOT PAY: LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE POLICY
I am repeating something that has appeared in this blog twice already. However it is a topic that that has featured in recent legal discussions on Twitter. That is the use of your own client’s home insurance policy to recover damages…
WHY SOLICITORS’ ATTENDANCE NOTES CAN BE IMPORTANT: CONSTRUING A CONSENT ORDER: DICTIONARIES AND REASONABLENESS
In Hague v British Telcommunications Plc (Immunotherapy : Reasonableness of Treatment : Private Dictionary Principle) [2018] EWHC 2227 (QB) Master Thornett had to construe the terms of a consent order. It is a case that emphasises the importance of attendance notes. …
PROVING THINGS 125: THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING YOUR OWN EXPERT IN THE LOOP: ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF READING AN EXPERT’S NOTES
In Swift v Carpenter [2018] EWHC 2060 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert gave a lengthy judgment in a high value personal injury case. One interesting aspect of that case is the problems caused by the defendant’s expert evidence on care. An additional…
PROVING THINGS 123: THE PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMANT WHO COULD NOT SAY WHETHER OR NOT HE HAD BEEN INJURED
We looked at the case of Kavak v FMC – HHJ Pearce Manchester CC 24.04.18) in an earlier post, primarily in the context of re-allocation. However that case provides a clear illustration of a failure to prove a basic element of…
CHANGING TRACK AFTER TRIAL: CLAIM RE-ALLOCATED FROM FAST TRACK TO SMALL CLAIMS TRACK: CLAIMANT CONFINED TO SMALL CLAIM TRACK COSTS
I am grateful to Michael Cordeux from Plexus Law for sending me a copy of the decision of His Honour JudgePearce, sitting in the Manchester County Court, on the 9th April 2018. It is an example of how a case…
APPEAL ON FINDING OF FACT ALLOWED: ANOTHER SKIRMISH IN THE CREDIT HIRE WAR
I am grateful to Lee Kipling from Winns, solicitors for sending me a copy of the decision of HH Judge Gosnell in Morris -v- MCE Insurance Company Ltd.( Morris v MCE Insurance (23.07.18) (Jud) (2)). A case where the judge allowed…
PROVING THINGS 122: THE CLAIMANT MAY NOT BE DISHONEST BUT SHE IS NOT ACCURATE: A HIGH IQ IS NO GUARANTEE OF COMMONSENSE
Many cases rest on the credibility of witnesses. A detailed examination can be found in the judgment of HH Judge Saggerson (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Hibberd-Little v Carlton [2018] EWHC 1787 (QB). There are issues here in relation…
RESPONDENT CAN STILL RAISE ISSUES ON DAMAGES AFTER LIABILITY IS DETERMINED: IMPORTANT POINT ON PROTECTING AN APPLICANT AS TO COSTS
The Court of Appeal decision in Office Equipment Systems Ltd v Hughes [2018] EWCA Civ 1842 is in relation to procedure in the Employment Tribunal. However there are two points in the judgment that are of general importance to civil practitioners. …
PROVING THINGS 121: FAILING TO PROVE LOSS OF EARNINGS, AND THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH WHERE FUTURE TREATMENT IS UNCERTAIN
Yesterday I looked at Welsh v Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust [2018] EWHC 1917 (QB) and the comments from the judge in relation to the joint statement of experts. The case also contains interesting observations in relation to proving damages. These are observations on matters…
PROVING THINGS 120: PROVING DAMAGES: THE DANGERS OF NOT HAVING A CREDIBLE “FALL BACK” POSITION
In Moore & Anor v National Westminster Bank [2018] EWHC 1805 (TCC) Mr Justice Birss dismissed an appeal by the defendant against an award of £115,000 in damages. It is a case about the appropriate assessment of damages when the defendant…
A FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: CLAIM DISMISSED – SOCIAL MEDIA AND FACEBOOK PLAY A PART…
In Pinkus v Direct Line [2018] EWHC 1671 (QB) HHJ Coe (sitting as a judge of the High Court) found a claimant to be fundamentally dishonest. It is another example of how the courts can look at social media to come…
You must be logged in to post a comment.