PART 36 AND INTERIM PAYMENTS: SOMETHING TO BE WARY ABOUT : COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
The case of Gamal v Synergy Lifestyle Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 210 is one that needs to be read with great care. A defendant who made a voluntary interim payment after making a Part 36 offer. The effect of this was…
SECTION 33 IN AN INDUSTRIAL DEAFNESS CASE: COURT OF APPEAL SAYS NO
We are looking again at the decision in Carr v Panel Products (Kimpton) Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 190 This was the first time the Court of Appeal had considered Section 33 of the Limitation Act since the decision in Carroll v Chief…
THE COURT “REGRETTED IF NOT DEPLORED” EXCESSIVE EXPENDITURE ON JURISDICTION ISSUES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Ogale Community & Ors v Royal Dutch Shell Plc & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 191 the Court of Appeal made observations about the need to keep applications about jurisdiction in proportion. “… hearings concerning the issue of appropriate forum should…
LIMITATION: DATE OF KNOWLEDGE: IT IS A MATTER OF FACT
I used to write a section/chapter on limitation in a legal looseleaf. The part on “date of knowledge” was, of course, my favourite*. Section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980 has led to many cases in relation to date of…
A “PART 36 OFFER” THAT ATTEMPTS TO VARY USUAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES IS NOT A PART 36 OFFER AT ALL: HIGH COURT DECISION
In James v James & Ors [2018] EWHC 242 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) determined an interesting issue in relation to an offer made in the course of proceedings. A “Part 36” offer which attempted to…
APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE PROPOSED RESPONDENT CAN HAVE THEIR SAY
An interesting point arose in the Court of Appeal decision today in Carr v Panel Products (Kimpton) Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 190. When a party seeks permission to appeal from the trial judge – can the other party make submissions in…
LIMITATION: WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: LIMITATION PERIOD STARTS TO RUN ON DAY CAUSE OF ACTION BEGINS
In Matthew & Ors v Sedman & Ors [2017] EWHC 3527 (Ch) His Honour Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) had to consider an interesting issue in relation to limitation. “… where it is absolutely clear…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: INACCURATE STATEMENT OF MEDICAL TREATMENT WAS DISHONEST: NO “SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE”
One of the many complex issues that Mrs Justice Cockerill considered in Razumas v Ministry of Justice [2018] EWHC 215 (QB) today was the question of fundamental dishonesty. The claimant gave a misleading account of medical treatment. He was found to…
OVERTURNING THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS FOR A COMMITTAL: THE AMOUNTS INVOLVED WERE “DISPROPORTIONATE AND WRONG
The previous post looked at the Court of Appeal decision today in Solanki v Intercity Telecom Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 101. A third element of that judgment was the defendant’s successful appeal against the costs of a committal application. The Court held…
JUDGE WAS WRONG NOT TO GRANT ADJOURNMENT ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH AND TO REFUSE TO SET ASIDE SUBSEQUENT JUDGMENT
In Solanki v Intercity Telecom Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 101 today the Court of Appeal overturned a decision discussed on this blog in 2015. The Court found that a judge should have granted a defendant an adjournment on ill-health grounds. He…
WITNESS EVIDENCE AND DOCUMENTS: GESTMIN CONSIDERED IN THE SUPREME COURT
In Bancoult, R (on the application of) (No 3) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Respondent)[2018] UKSC 3 the Supreme Court considered the “Gestmin” principles. There are several aspectse of the judgment. Here we look at the judgment…
MOVING THE APPEAL TRIBUNAL FURTHER & FURTHER AWAY FROM THE APPELLANT’S HOME: PROCEDURAL UNFAIRNESS
Earlier this week I paid tribute to Sir Henry Brooke. This included his most recent work dealing with PIPs and ESAs. He wrote in his blog: “Readers of these blogs will know I have been telling stories of the injustices…
GOBBETS AND LIMITATION: ISSUES AT THE DREAMING SPIRES
There are many fascinating aspects of the judgment in Siddiqui v The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford [2018] EWHC 184 (QB). As is often the case I have chosen to concentrate on one of the most prosaic…
WANT TO WORK HARD, WIN AND STILL NOT GET PAID II? LAWYERS COME TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: REVIEW YOUR RETAINER CAREFULLY
In Radford & Anor v Frade & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 119 the Court of Appeal upheld the early decisions that lawyers, who worked outside the terms of their retainer under a CFA, could not recover costs from the unsuccessful party….
90% WAS A GENUINE OFFER OF SETTLEMENT: CLAIMANT RECEIVES PART 36 BENEFITS AFTER OFFERING A 10% DISCOUNT
In the judgment today in JMX (A child by his Mother and Litigation Friend, FMX) v Norfolk and Norwich Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 185 (QB) Mr Justice Foskett was very robust in his view that an offer of…
PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE VI: COULD PROJECT MANAGEMENT HELP?
This series on proportionality for litigators is a long-running one. One suggestion is that “Legal project management” could help. There is a very short entry in Wikipedia as to what “Legal project management” is. LEGAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT I put questions to…
WITNESS EVIDENCE: CREATING AN ACCURATE RECORD OF INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT AT WORK: SPOT – AN IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT
I have written before about the book The Memory Illusion. In essence lawyers need to be concerned about how easy it is for false memories to be created and how fallible the human memory is. The creation of an inaccurate…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: INFORMED CONSENT NOT GIVEN: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT TODAY
There are many posts on this blog about how, ultimately, many clinical negligence cases turn on the issue of what was said. Liability often depends on which account of a conversation the trial judge prefers. This can be seen in stark…
PART 36: THE UNCERTAIN PROGNOSIS AND THE CLAIMANT’S CONUNDRUM: FIVE POINTS TO THINK ABOUT
The earlier post on the Court of Appeal decision in Briggs -v- CEF Holdings Ltd [2017] EWCA 2363 (Civ) gives rise to a conundrum that claimants (and sometimes defendants) have to address. How do you advise a client when a Part 36…
SIR HENRY BROOKE: A TRIBUTE TO HIS ONLINE PRESENCE
There are many moving obituaries to Sir Henry Brooke, to his work as a lawyer, a judge and campaigner. Here I want to pay tribute to his online work. It is significant that Sir Henry had a very full and…
PROVING THINGS: IF YOU LIKE THE BLOGS – THEN WATCH THE MOVIE…
The Webinar I did last week called “Proving things: if you don’t prove it, then you don’t get it” is now available for purchase online. TOPICS COVERED Topics covered include: “If you don’t prove it you don’t get it” Witness…
THE SHORTER TRIAL SCHEME: PROCEDURAL WRANGLING AND PROBLEMATIC EXPERT EVIDENCE: IT CAN’T BE BRUSHED ASIDE
In the judgment today in L’Oréal Société Anonyme RN Ventures Ltd [2018] EWHC 173 (Pat) Mr Justice Henry Carr set out his concerns on aspects of the procedure and expert evidence before the court. The judgment contains some lessons for litigators…
STATUTORY INTEREST: THE AIM IS TO COMPENSATE NOT TO PUNISH
In Carrasco v Johnson [2018] EWCA Civ 87 the Court of Appeal considered the appropriate rate for statutory interest. It reiterates important principles in relation to the court’s discretion in deciding the appropriate rate for the award of interest. “… interest…
SOLICITORS, SAVAGE POODLES: LAWYERS AND THEIR DOGS – 70 YEARS OF LEGAL PRACTICE
I bought a copy of “The Savage Poodle: Tales from Legal Practice” from Wildys on Wednesday. I didn’t plan to review it, but then a plan hatched in my mind… THE BOOK The book consists of selected extracts from the…
ACCEPT A PART 36 OFFER LATE AND PAY THE CONSEQUENCES: LITIGATION CAN BE A HARSH WORLD
I have been waiting for a while to see the transcript of the Court of Appeal decision in Briggs -v- CEF Holdings Ltd [2017] EWCA 2363 (Civ), some people have even written enquiring whether I have covered it. It is a…
DENTON APPLIED TO LATE APPEAL: SUBMITTING SUBMISSIONS AFTER A HEARING AND THE NEED FOR CAUTION WHEN SEEKING DAMAGES UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT
In Fayad, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 54 the Court of Appeal applied the Denton principles to a late appeal. Permission to appeal was refused. Mr Justice Singh had…
DENTON CONSIDERED: ADDITIONAL ALLEGATIONS MADE IN RELATION TO A SOLICITOR FORGING A WITNESS STATEMENT
The Denton criteria were considered by Mr Justice Sweeney in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 94 (QB). These were considered in an an unusual context. There are allegations (and it must be stressed that these…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY A DOZEN THINGS TO THINK ABOUT: A RECAP
Given recent decisions on fundamental dishonesty this may be a good time to rake over some key points. “I assure the Committee that the way that the clause is drafted should not result in the courts using the measures lightly….
INAPPROPRIATE USE OF PART 8 PROCEDURE: “AN ENTIRELY UNSATISFACTORY WAY TO PROCEED”: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Victory House General Partner Ltd v RGB P&C Ltd [2018] EWHC 102 (TCC) Miss Joanna Smith QC (sitting as a Deputy) was clear in her view that a claimant had used the Part 8 procedure inappropriately. “In my judgment this…
FACT FINDING IN THE FAMILY COURT: ERRATIC WITNESSES AND BEHAVIOUR ON DISCLOSURE WHERE THE CONDUCT WAS NOT FAR SHORT OF CONTEMPT
We have looked at “fact finding” by the courts many times. The fact finder in a family case has a particularly arduous and unenviable task . The judge has to assess evidence that is often highly charged, and where there…
THE PERILOUS STRATEGY OF SERVING EVIDENCE LATE: DENTON APPLIES: A RELEVANT FACTOR IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION
The case of Crown House Technologies Ltd v Cardiff Commissioning Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 54 (TCC) highlights the dangers of waiting to serve evidence until the last moment. If it is served late then a party requires permission of the…
WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON’T COMPLY WITH THE RULES: 10 REASONS WHY THE GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT: LITIGATION REQUIRES EVIDENCE NOT GOSSIP
There is a brief report on Lawtel that highlights the need for compliance with the rules relating to witness statements. The issue of failing to give sources of information and belief has been dealt with several times on this blog….
COURT ORDER ALLOWING PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE EXTENSIONS OF TIME: A BRIEF EXAMPLE
I am grateful to Dominic Regan for providing a precedent that allows the parties to extend time for compliance prospectively and retrospectively. THE ISSUE During a discussion on Twitter Dominic mentioned that some courts were habitually making orders that allowed…
THE HOURLY RATE FOR INCURRED COSTS: WHY IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THESE ARE SET OUT CORRECTLY: HIGHER HOURLY RATES THAN THE RETAINER SHOULD START THE ALARM
I am grateful to Benjamin Petrecz, Associate and Costs Lawyer at Keoghs LLP, for bringing my attention to a decision of Master Rowley in Tucker -v- Griffiths & Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (19/05/17) in relation to costs budgeting. A…
PROVING THINGS 85: AN INABILITY TO PROVE EVEN A SMALL SUM MEANS IT WILL NOT BE AWARDED
Many of the issues that have been looked at in the Proving Things series have been in relation to failures to prove substantial issues, or substantial sums. However the need to prove things is a universal requirement. I want to look…
PROVING THINGS 84: THE NEED TO PROVE A LOSS IS A PRESSING ONE: THAT OLD FASHIONED NEED TO PROVE DAMAGES: BUSINESS INTERRUPTION CLAIM REJECTED
In Contact (Print And Packaging) Ltd v Travelers Insurance Co Ltd [2018] EWHC 83 (TCC) His Honour Judge Stephen Davies (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered (and rejected) a claimant’s claim for damages for interruption to its business. It is…
DENTON APPLIED WHEN THE OTHER SIDE DOES NOT SHOW UP FOR TRIAL
In Foreman v Williams [2017] EWHC 3370 (QB) Peter Marquand (sitting as a High Court judge) considered the application of the Denton principles in an unusual context. The claimant required relief from sanctions because he was unable to serve documents on…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED ON APPEAL: WHEN A CLAIMANT DIGS A BIG HOLE FOR THEMSELVES THE COURT SHOULD NOT STRUGGLE TO EXTRACT THEM
In London Organising Committee of the Olympic And Paralympic Games (LOCOG) v Sinfield [2018] EWHC 51 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles overturned a decision whereby a claimant was allowed damages. The claimant had been fundamentally dishonest in making a claim for…
THE ADVANTAGES OF GETTING WITNESS EVIDENCE EARLY – AND GETTING IT RIGHT: REDUCING THE RISKS OF LITIGATION
It is worthwhile repeating, and thinking about one part of the judgment of Master Leonard Douglas v Ministry of Justice & Anor [2018] EWHC B2 (Costs). “… the cost of preparing witness evidence will normally be recoverable as part of the cost…
THE COSTS OF MEDIATION AND THE COSTS BUDGET: AVOIDING A POSSIBLE TRAP
I am grateful to Alan Mendham for writing to point out a possible trap in relation to costs budgeting and mediation. Alan points out that disputes can arise as to whether mediation is included in the phase for settlement…
COSTS: THE COSTS OF ATTENDING AN INQUEST: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH
In Douglas v Ministry of Justice & Anor [2018] EWHC B2 (Costs) Master Leonard considered the issue of the recoverability of costs of attending an inquest. There is a highly nuanced approach. The issues raised are of more general relevance in…
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW, SERIES 2 PART 6 : “GORILLAS FROM THE NORTH”: SIR HARRY OGNALL
In this series about a judge’s guide to advocacy I looking at – and recommending – “A Life of Crime” by (Sir) Harry Ognall (plain “Harry Ognall” on the front page of the book). Unlike a lot of memoirs this…
WHEN THE PLEADINGS APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN PUT IN THE PAPER BIN AT TRIAL (SHADES OF THE OFFICE)
The judgment in Premier Paper Group Ltd v Buchanan McPherson Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 15 contains some interesting observations about the way in which the parties departed from their pleadings. Although the claim succeeded this case how important it is that…
PROVING THINGS 83: WHEN A DEFENDANT DOES NOT GIVE EVIDENCE, ADVERSE INFERENCES CAN BE DRAWN: STAGED CRASH ESTABLISHED
In UK Insurance Ltd v Gentry [2018] EWHC 37 (QB) Mr Justice Teare considered what inferences can properly be drawn when a defendant, accused of dishonesty, does not give evidence. KEY POINTS The claimant brought a case in deceit – alleging…
WHEN A PARTY CHANGES ITS FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS PART WAY THROUGH: A CHANGE FROM DBA TO CFA DID NOT PREVENT THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING FULL COSTS
The decision of Master James in Dial Partners LLP & Anor v Eastern Airways International Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC B1 (Costs) raises an interesting set of issues when a party changes the basis of its funding part-way through a case,…
FIRST CLAIM FORM CASE OF THE YEAR: THE DANGERS OF LEAVING SERVICE UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE
It is the middle of January (bluebells nowhere in sight) and we have already have a claim form case to consider. In Kennedy v The National Trust for Scotland [2017] EWHC 3368 (QB) Sir David Eady considered whether service (at the…
PROPORTIONALITY, CASES AND COMMENT: A ROUND UP
The post yesterday on the Brian May case and proportionality highlighted the fact that this is still a major issue in litigation. It is a good time to set out the posts on this blog on proportionality to date. PREVIOUS…
SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT DURING CLOSING SUBMISSIONS AT TRIAL: A “HIGHLY UNUSUAL CASE”
I am grateful to barrister Robert Smith for sending me a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Gargan in the case of Jackson -v- Durham County Council & ors (20th December 2017). The judgment dealt with the issue…
LIMITATION: DISEMBARKATION AND THE TWO YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD: THE BARQUE AND THE BIGHT
In Collins v Lawrence [2017] EWCA 2268 Civ Lord Justice Hamblen considered an issue under limitation and the Convention Relating to Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea (the “Athens Convention”). It serves as an important reminder that many cases…
THE BRIAN MAY COSTS CASE: TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE: PROPORTIONALITY APPEAL DID NOT BITE THE DUST
Thanks to the good offices of the ACL the judgment on appeal of May -v- Wavell Group Ltd is now available here. The claimant’s appeal on the issue of proportionality was allowed. The figure of £35,000 plus vat for costs…
You must be logged in to post a comment.