THE PARTIES CANNOT CONTRACT OUT OF COSTS BUDGETING (& A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WITHOUT PREJUDICE CORRESPONDENCE)
An earlier post dealt with the decision of Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman [2016] CAT 21. However an earlier ruling in the same case contains a consideration of whether the parties can agree to sidestep budgeting….
COSTS MANAGEMENT AND PROPORTIONALITY IN ACTION
Issues of costs budgeting and proportionality were considered by Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman [2016] CAT 21. It provides an interesting example of the judicial approach to proportionality and costs budgeting. “Proportionality is fundamental to…
WITNESS CREDIBILITY, DELAY AND DENTON.
There is an interesting discussion of the credibility of witnesses in the judgment of Mr Registrar Briggs in Preston -v- Green (Liquidator of Cre8atsea Limited) [2016] EWHC 25222 (Ch). The Registrar also had to consider whether to exercise his discretion…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FINDING SET ASIDE ON APPEAL
The judgment of His Honour Judge Hodge QC in Meadows -v- La Tasca Restaurants Limited [2016]EW Misc B28 (CC) (16 June 2016) is now available on Bailli. It contains some important observations about findings of fundamental dishonesty. “In my judgment,…
PROPORTIONALITY AND COSTS: A JUDGMENT ON APPEAL
In the judgment today in Tui UK Ltd -v- Tickell & Others [2016] EWHC 2741 (QB) Mrs Justice Elisabeth Laing DBE (sitting with Master Leonard as an assessor) dismissed an appeal by the defendants on an argument that the costs…
"DID NOT PRETEND TO UNDERSTAND THINGS ATTRIBUTED TO HER IN HER WITNESS STATEMENT…"
There are several high profile cases in which judges have expressed scepticism (sometimes profound scepticism) about whether a witness statement really reflects the knowledge of a witness. A short, but telling, passage in the judgment of Mr Justice Mitting in…
TALES FROM COSTS LAW CONFERENCE II: THE RISE OF SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS DISPUTES
One of the predictions made by several speakers at the Association of Costs Lawyers conference last week was the likelihood of a rise in the number of solicitor and own client disputes in relation to costs. Clients are now paying…
COSTS BUDGETING: PILOT SCHEME IN THE CHANCERY DIVISION IN LEEDS
Leeds District Registry has a pilot scheme in relation to costs budgeting. It enables the parties to agree to limit the extent of costs budgeting. The parties can, by agreement, file a simple costs budget with the Directions Questionnaire. If…
ANOTHER EXPERT WITNESS GOES AWRY: PATENTLY A PROBLEM
It is easy for the non-technical reader to pass over judgments relating to patents. These often involve highly technical issues. However there is one aspect of the judgment in Thoratec Europe Limited -v- AIS GMBH Aachen Innovative Solutions [2016] EWHC…
COSTS BUDGETING: IT'S JUST A PHASE I'M GOING THROUGH
One advantage of going to conferences is that it usually gives rise to ideas for the blog. So speaking at the Association of Costs Lawyers conference yesterday has given rise to a whole host of issues which will be explored…
EVIDENCE, RETAINERS, ATTENDANCE NOTES AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY
There have been a number of recent cases where disgruntled clients have attempted to sue their lawyers. The judgments highlight the difficulties for trial judges who have to assess evidence after some lapse of time. They also highlight the importance…
PART 36 OFFERS AND COSTS: COSTS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN CONSIDERING WHETHER AN OFFER HAS BEEN "BEATEN"
In Transocean Drilling UK Ltd -v- Providence Resources PLC [2016] EWHC 2611 (Comm) Mr Justice Popplewell considered the impact of a Part 36 offer in unusual circumstances. These circumstances led the court to consider whether the impact of costs should…
HIGH COURT OVERTURNS DECISION TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: NON-COMPLIANCE CANNOT AMOUNT TO "GOOD REASON"
In Pittville Ltd -v- Hunters & Frankau Limited [2016] EWHC 2683 Mr Justice Snowden overturned the decision of a Deputy Master granting relief from sanctions. The judgment contains an important consideration of the question of “good reasons” for…
WHEN SHOULD A WINNING PARTY PAY THE COSTS OF THE OTHER SIDE?
In Hospira UK Limited -v- Cubist Pharmaceuticals LLC [2016] EWHC 2661 Pat Mr Justice Henry Carr considered the question of when an “issue based” costs order should be made. “In my view, this apparent dichotomy may be resolved by a…
REASONABLENESS AND PROPORTIONALITY: A DIRECT IMPACT UPON LITIGATION DECISIONS
I have been writing for some time about the impact of “proportionality” upon the practice of litigation itself. One example of this can be found in the judgment of Master James in Briggs & 598 others -v- First Choice Holidays…
WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE: A MASTERLY EXPOSITION
The judgment of Master Matthews in Darby Properties Ltd -v- Lloyds Bank Plc [2016] 2494 (Ch) contains an important consideration of the rules relating to the admissibility of expert evidence. In particular when is expert evidence “necessary”? “… although I…
SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE A BREACH OF ARTICLE 8 RIGHTS: ECHR DECISION
In Vukota-Bojic -v- Switzerland the European Court held that the surveillance of an insurance claimant represented a breach of Article 8 rights (but use of that evidence at a hearing was not a breach of Article 6 rights). It could…
NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET FILED LATE: THE DECISION IN DETAIL
We have looked, briefly, at the Court of Appeal decision in Jamadar -v- Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] EWCA Civ 1001. I am grateful to Aaron Vodden of Hempsons for sending me a copy of the transcript which…
PAYING THE CORRECT COURT FEE AND LIMITATION: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES
One decision that has led to interlocutory skirmishing and opportunistic applications is Lewis v Ward Hadaway [2016] 4 WLR 6, [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch) and the consequences of failing to pay the correct court fee on issue. This has left many…
PROVING THINGS 35: RECONSTRUCTION, DOCUMENTS AND MEMORY
Most law reports will look at the findings of law made in a judgment. In this blog we are interested in findings of fact and the way in which a judge goes about making those findings. A good example can…
PROVING THINGS 34 : THERE IS NO PRIMER FOR SCUTTLERS: WHEN YOUR SHIP DOESN'T COME IN
We have looked at many different types of case during this series. However this is the first time we have looked at an Admiralty case and at case about the “scuttling” of a ship. The judgment of Mr Justice…
LATE ACCEPTANCE OF CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS: TWO CONTRASTING CASES & THE GREAT DEBATE
There is an ongoing debate about whether the Defendant should, or does, face any adverse consequences when a Claimant’s Part 36 offer is accepted late. I had a recent email from solicitor John McQuater of Atherton Godfrey. Here I…
A JUDGMENT ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COSTS BUDGETING AND THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: MAPPING & SURVEYING THE TERRAIN
In a judgment given today in Merrix -v-Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust Regional Costs Judge District Judge Lumb (sitting in Birmingham) considered the extent to which the costs budgeting regime fettered the powers and discretion of the costs judge…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW IX: WHAT YOU WEAR MATTERS
This is the ninth (and penultimate) post in this series. It is inspired by a search term on this blog today “Can a solicitor dress casually in county court”. This caused a lot of attention when I mentioned in on…
CLAIMANT MUST REVEAL IDENTITY OF THIRD PARTY FUNDERS: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Wall -v- The Royal Bank of Scotland PLC [2016] EWHC 2460 (Comm) (Mr Andrew Baker QC sitting as a High Court Judge) the claimant was ordered to reveal the identity of third party funders. KEY POINTS The court has…
ALLEGATIONS AGAINST SOLICITORS THAT PROBABLY SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE: CONSPIRACY, DISHONESTY AND DECEIT – ASSERTIONS THAT WERE JUST UNTRUE
There have been a number of recent cases of property companies, who have lost heavily in the property market, seeking to recover from solicitors (not necessarily always their own solicitors) for those losses. This trend can be seen -…
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW VIII: "CREDIBILITY IS ALL YOU HAVE"
This post looks at at an article by Sidney Butcher in the ABA publication “Views from the Bench: Tips for Young Lawyers on How to Make a Good Impression.” The Honorable Lynne Stewart, a District Court Judge and the Honourable…
THE MALLEABLE WITNESS: ANOTHER EXAMPLE WHERE LAWYERS WERE BLAMED FOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS
We have looked before at cases where witnesses point to their lawyers when discrepancies appear in their witness statements. This can occur in every type of case as can be seen by the judgment of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in Fluor…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW VII: WITNESS STATEMENTS – SHORT AND SWEET IS BEST
We have already looked once this week at a judge’s viewpoint on the drafting of witness statements. In terms of advocacy they are crucial. The rules only allow the witness to give additional evidence in exceptional circumstances. Many cases that…
PROVING THINGS 33: CAUSATION AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN CLAIMS AGAINST SOLICITORS
We have looked before at the decision in The Connaught Income Fund, Series 1 -v- Hewetts Solicitors [2016] EWHC 2286 (Ch). The previous post was in connection with witness evidence. However the judgment on the burden of proof is significant in terms…
DESTINATION OF APPEALS: THE NEW RULES
The Access to Justice Act 1999 (Destination of Appeals) Order 2016 makes some important changes to the destination of appeals. It “simplifies” the appeals process so that, as far as possible, an appeal lies to the next level of judge….
JUDICIAL ASSESSMENT OF EXPERT EVIDENCE: NOT SIMPLY A CASE OF WHICH EXPERT IS PREFERRED
There is a short passage in the judgment in Barclays Bank PLC -v- Christie Owen & Davies Limited [2016] EWHC 2351 (Ch) which considers the appropriate approach of the court when considering expert evidence. “To consider simply whether to prefer…
BEING A LITIGATOR – WHEN IT ALL GETS TOO MUCH (AND IT IS YOU THAT HAS TO PICK UP THE PIECES)
There have been a number of reported cases recently of young lawyers (sometimes trainees) obviously becoming overwhelmed by their workload. This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it necessarily confined to young members of the profession. However it is…
LITIGANTS IN PERSON AND CASE MANAGEMENT: TIMELY SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS – DRAWING FROM THE FAMILY DIVISION
Recent cases have made it clear that litigants in person do not have any special status during the conduct of litigation. However it is equally clear that, when making case management decisions, the court has to have regard to the…
WITNESS STATEMENTS, THE WEATHER AND THE DISTRICT JUDGE…
The observations by District Judge Etherington reported by John Hyde in the Law Society Gazette deserve repetition and the widest audience possible. (The Readers’ comments on the article also make for interesting reading). THE GAZETTE REPORT The District Judge was speaking…
THIS COSTS BUDGETING THING – IT IS NOT THAT IMPORTANT: WELL THINK AGAIN
There are some important observations made by Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman Limited [2016] EWHC 2315 (Ch) in relation to both costs budgeting and security for costs. KEY POINTS There is no duty on a…
RECOVERING LITIGATION FUNDING COSTS: A HIGH COURT CASE -BUT ABOUT ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS
I am grateful to Professor Dominic Regan and Nicholas Bacon QC for sending me a copy of the decision in Essar Oilfields -v- Norscot [2016] EWHC 2361 (Comm).A decision of His Honour Judge Waksman QC sitting as a Judge of…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THINGS GO WRONG – BLAME THE SOLICITOR
This blog has noted before that a witness whose evidence is not accepted often attempts to renege on their witness statement and blame their solicitor for the errors. Another example can be found in the recent decision of Mr Recorder…
PROVING THINGS 32: DAMAGES CLAIM STRUCK OUT AS UNSUSTAINABLE; APPLICATION TO AMEND REFUSED.
In Guney -v- Kingsley Napley [2016] EWHC 2349 (QB) Mrs Justice McGowan struck out part of the claimant’s claim for damages and refused the claimant permission to amend to plead new heads of damage. It could serve as an object…
TWO PROCEDURAL POINTS: A SECOND ACTION IS NOT ALWAYS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS & A BANKRUPT CANNOT BRING PROCEEDINGS
The judgment of Master Bowles in Khan -v- Khan & Ambala Foods Limited [2015] EWHC 2625 (Ch) contains a reminder of two important procedural points. KEY POINTS (1) The issue of a second set of proceedings is potentially an abuse…
PROVING THINGS 31: WITNESSES TEND TO REMEMBER WHAT THEY WANT TO REMEMBER
How do judges decide whether a witness is accurate in their recollection? This issue has been a common theme on this blog. This was an issue considered by Mark Cawson QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in The Connaught…
THE INFERENCES TO BE DRAWN FROM ABSENT WITNESSES: EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT OVERRIDES HEARSAY
This blog has looked many times at cases which consider the practical implication of the test in Central Manchester Health Authority v W (A minor) [1998] PIQR P324: the inferences a trial judge should infer when witnesses are noted called at…
SOLICITOR'S AGENT HAS NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE AT STAGE 3 HEARING: COUNTY COURT DECISION CONSIDERED
Who has a right of audience at a Stage 3 hearing? This issue has been considered in the county court and I am grateful to barrister Jonathan Dingle for sending me a copy of the decision of District Judge Peake…
INVALID SERVICE OF CLAIM ON SOLICITORS: ANOTHER CLAIM FORM INCORRECTLY SERVED
Problems with service of the claim form are a regular feature of this blog. I have written, many times, about the dangers of leaving service of the claim form until the last minute. I have also written, many times, about…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW VI: HOW A JUDGE ASSESSES WITNESS EVIDENCE
We have covered many countries so far in this series which looks at the advice that judges give on advocacy. For the next few posts I have decided to stay closer to home. I want to look at the…
CANAL TRUST’S ATTEMPTS TO BARGE OVER WITHOUT PREJUDICE RULE IS SUNK WITHOUT TRACE: NO WATERING DOWN OF THE PRINCIPLES
Can a party refer to without prejudice correspondence at interlocutory hearings? The previous post looked at the judgment of Chief Master Marsh in Ravenscroft -v- Canal & River Trust [2016] EWHC 2282 (Ch) in relation to the issue of McKenzie friends….
MCKENZIE FRIENDS AND THE THREE WISE MONKEYS: A DISCRETION TO BE EXERCISED RARELY
In Ravenscroft -v- Canal & River Trust [2016] EWHC 2282 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh considered the law relating to allowing a McKenzie friend to be permitted to act. (This case also considered the use of without prejudice correspondence in court,…
PROVING THINGS 30: OFFICE GOSSIP PROVES NOTHING: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
There is a requirement, a mandatory requirement, that a witness making a witness statement gives the source of their information and belief. This requirement is often ignored, or there is some vague and general wording of knowledge. Ignoring, and respecting,…
WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT ARE LARGELY DISREGARDED: A CASE IN POINT
Witness statements are often too long, contain inadmissible evidence and tendentious comments. An example can be see in the judgment in Moore -v- Moore [2016] EWHC 2202 (Ch) Mr S Monty QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery…
You must be logged in to post a comment.