MITIGATING THE IMPACT OF THE COURT FEES INCREASE 1: LIMITATION STANDSTILL AGREEMENTS
The general view of the court fee increases is well known. The increases are based on inadequate research and will have a major detrimental effect on the economy as well as the interests of justice. Since the increases are likely…
FOR TWO DOLLARS MORE: THE DANGERS OF NOT SENDING THE CORRECT COURT FEE
I am grateful to Gerard McDermott QC for sending me details from the American Bar Association Journal of a £2.5 million case in Powhattan Circuit Court where a $2.5 million dollar action failed because the court fee was incorrect by…
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS: A SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS POSTS
There are now over 640 individual posts on this blog. Occasionally it helps to recap. Here I provide links to the series on “avoiding negligence” claims written at the end of 2013. THE SERIES The series was primarily aimed at…
LIMITATION, PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT: AN IMPORTANT LESSON
The case of Seton House Group -v- Mercer Ltd [2014] EWHC 4234 (Ch) shows the importance of being certain of a limitation period and issuing well before that date. In this case, however, the limitation period had passed well before the…
ISSUING CONTRIBUTION PROCEEDINGS WITHIN THE LIMITATION PERIOD: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
A party has two years to bring a claim for a contribution under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978. In The Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary -v- Southampton City Council [2014] EWCA Civ 1541 the Court of Appeal found that…
LIMITATION: DELIBERATE CONCEALMENT BY THE DEFENDANT EXTENDS THE LIMITATION PERIOD
In IT Human Resources PLC -v- Land [2014] EWHC3812 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan considered when the limitation period started when there had been concealment by a defendant. It is an important example of s.32 of the Limitation Act 1980 in…
LIMITATION & THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF HEARING LOSS
In Platt -v- BRB Residuary Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1401 the Court of Appeal considered issues relating to the date of knowledge in the context of a claim for hearing loss. THE LAW The relevant sections of the 1980 Act…
SECTION 14A OF THE LIMITATION ACT: DON'T RELY ON s.14A BEING A GOOD INVESTMENT
In Susan Jacobs -v- Sesame Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1410 the Court of Appeal held that the claimant could not take advantage of s.14A of the Limitation Act 1980. The date of knowledge was much earlier than that found by…
LIMITATION IN A BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIM: DATE OF ACCRUAL; LATENT DAMAGE AND AMENDING UNDER CPR 17.4.(2): A CASE IN POINT
In Interface Europe Ltd -v- Premier Hanks Dyers Ltd [2014] EWHC 2610 (QB) Judge Saffman (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered the issue of the relevant date of accrual of a cause of action in a breach…
SECOND ACTION AFTER SETTLEMENT NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: SECTION 33 APPLICATION ALLOWED: DOWDALL CONSIDERED IN DETAIL
The case of Dowdall -v- William Kenyon & Sons Ltd [2014] EWHC 2822 (QB) decided yesterday contains some important observations in relation to allegations of abuse of process; estoppel and section 33. THE FACTS Mr Dowdall has pleural mesotheliomia. In 2003…
AMENDING PLEADINGS: HAS THE LIMITATION PERIOD EXPIRED? WHERE DOES THE BURDEN OF PROOF LIE?
The Court of Appeal decision today in Mercer -v- Ballinger [2014] EWCA Civ 996 may appear to be an issue of esoteric civil procedure. However the decision is an important one with far-ranging practical consequences for a party seeking to…
"ESSENTIAL CHECKLISTS": THE COMPLETE LIST
The “Essential Checklist” series developed out of a workshop series in a course I gave last month. Six groups produced six checklists. Here is a link to them all. SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS: (“SERVICE WITH A SMILE”) Essential points before the…
SECTION 33 AND “LONG TAIL CLAIMS”: CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE AND RELEVANCE OF DELAY BETWEEN THE BREACH AND THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE
In Collins -v- Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 717 the Court of Appeal considered the appropriate legal test for the date of knowledge and exercise of the section 33 discretion when an…
LIMITATION: THE ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST: BACK TO THE FUTURE AT WORK
This is the second “essential checklist” compiled at a recent course held by Zenith Chambers. In this workshop practitioners (primarily solicitors), of all levels and type of experience, were asked to produce checklists for the “danger” areas of practice….
LIMITATION: ESSENTIAL POINTS BEFORE THE "ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST"
We have already had the essential checklist on service. We are now moving on to the essential checklist for limitation. Before the Mitchell case it was usually limitation that was a major problem for litigators, particularly personal injury practitioners. It…
TEN LIMITATION MYTHS THAT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER SHOULD KNOW
I am giving a webinar for CLT on the 4th March. Booking details can be found here “Limitation and PI Claims: 10 Myths that Every Practitioner Should Know” This webinar identifies and debunks 10 of the most common myths and…
TROUBLES WITH THE COURT: REFUSING TO ISSUE AND STRIKING OUT BECAUSE OF ALLEGED LIMITATION ISSUES: MORE EXAMPLES AND CASE LAW THAT MAY HELP
Hot on the heels of the complaint about the court wrongfully striking out an action came another, remarkable story about the court refusing to issue proceedings because of alleged limitation issues. THE REMARKABLE STORY Here it is in its original…
CIVIL PROCEDURE, COSTS & SANCTIONS: LINKS TO RECENT ARTICLES AND POST
Links to posts and articles on all aspects of civil procedure. Linking does not indicate approval or agreement but that all discussion on these issues is useful. RECENT POSTS AND ARTICLES 23rd June 2019 Herbert Smith Freehills Litigation Notes…
ISSUING PROCEEDINGS A SECOND TIME: NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: HALL –v- MINISTRY OF DEFENCE EXAMINED
Can a claimant issue again if an action is struck because of a failure to comply with the rules and? This is likely to become a question of considerable interest given the number of cases that are failing because of…
CAN A STRUCK OUT CLAIMANT ISSUE AGAIN? EXERCISE OF THE SECTION 33 DISCRETION AFTER A FIRST ACTION HAS BEEN DISMISSED.
One of the “open” questions following the Mitchell decision is whether a claimant refused relief from sanctions can issue again. That is an open question (which will be considered at another time). Here we look at the court’s approach to…
THE DANGERS OF GETTING THE COURT FEES WRONG: IF THE FEES ARE NOT RIGHT – YOU HAVEN'T ISSUED
If proceedings are being issued at the last moment then it is imperative that the correct fee is lodged at court. A failure to send the correct fee will mean that proceedings are not properly issued. This post looks at…
TEN MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION THAT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATOR SHOULD KNOW.
There are a surprising number of “myths” that prevail in personal injury litigation. In particular in relation to limitation. Here, as part of the “avoiding negligence” series we look at 10 of these myths. Myth 1: In a breach of…
ACCIDENTS ABROAD AND THE FOREIGN LIMITATION PERIODS ACT: AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS 5
It is easy to assume that every jurisdiction has a limitation period of three years. However when an accident happens abroad the Foreign Limitation Periods Act 1984 provides that the relevant limitation period is the period that prevails in…
TROUBLE AT SEA: LIMITATION PERIODS AND WATER TRAVEL: AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE 4
We continue the examination of limitation periods that are not necessarily three years. Accidents that happen at sea, or on water generally, can be subject to different limitation periods and, normally, a two year limitation period applies. TWO YEAR PERIODS…
AVIATION AND LIMITATION: 10 QUESTIONS EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATOR SHOULD ASK
A tweet on the 8th October 2013 read: “PI Claim struck out because Montreal Convention pleaded instead of Warsaw Convention.” (The case in question is reported in detail by Jasmine Murphy on the Hardwicke Chambers website.) This reiterates the points…
LITIGATION AFTER JACKSON: A 10 POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE
There has been a tremendous change in policy in relation to case management after 1st April 2013. This has already led to major difficulties for some litigators. This post is the first (of what may be many) survival guides for…
LIMITATION: SECTION 33 AND FATAL ACCIDENT & LAW REFORM ACT CLAIMS
I have posted a short article on a recent case on Section 33 and the Limitation Act 1980 on my blog on Fatal Accident Law at http://fatalaccidentlaw.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/issuing-late-section-33-and-the-fatal-accidents-act-and-law-reform-act-an-example-of-a-claimant-succeeding/… Enjoying this post? Become a Civil Litigation Brief member to read full articles and…
LIMITATION: WHAT'S THE POSITION WHEN THE DEFENDANTS WON'T TELL YOU WHO THEY ARE?
This post looks at the issue raised in Parkin –v- Alba Proteins Ltd where a party failed to disclose the identity/ existence of additional defendants prior to the issue of proceedings. In Parkin –v- Alba Proteins Ltd [2013] EWHC 2036…
AVIATION AND THE REALLY VICIOUS LIMITATION PERIOD : AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE 3
AVIATION AND LIMITATION The purpose of this post is to make you feel really uncomfortable when you are involved with a case that involves aviation, in any way shape or form. Including when your client is injured in an airport….
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE 2 : NOT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LIMITATION PERIOD IS THREE YEARS.
“THOSE LIMITATION PERIODS THAT CAN BITE YOU IN THE BOTTOM” It can come to a shock to some litigators that not every action has a three year limitation period. Some have a two year period and some less than that. …
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE 1 : THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD: HOW DOES ANYONE MISS IT?
How does anyone miss a three year limitation period? The basic answer is usually some kind of maladministration. Often a failure of the diary system. Someone has inserted the wrong month, occasionally the wrong year. Sometimes there is no diary…
You must be logged in to post a comment.