WRITING INFLAMMATORY THINGS IN COURT DOCUMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE: IT NEVER, EVER, HELPS
We are looking at the judgment of HHJ Edward Hess in TM v KM [2022] EWFC 155 for two reasons: firstly the costs involved; secondly the judge’s observations about the unattractiveness of putting personal pejorative remarks in court documents. There…
DEFENDANT DID NOT ATTEND TRIAL: APPLICATION FOR REMOTE HEARING NOT ALLOWED: JUDGMENT ENTERED: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL UNSUCESSFUL
In Sobowale v Lendinvest Capital SARL [2024] EWHC 1829 (Ch) Nicola Rushton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) dismissed a defendant’s appeal against judgment being entered against him when he failed to attend a trial. “There was no…
WHEN EXPERTS KNOW EACH OTHER AND SPEAK AT THE SAME CONFERENCES: ATTACKS ON THE CREDIBILITY OF THE EXPERTS WERE REJECTED
There are some interesting observations about expert witness evidence in the judgment in Biggadike v El Farra & Anor [2024] EWHC 1688 (KB) Firstly in relation to the attendance at clinical seminars (during the course of the trial). Secondly in relation to…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, EVIDENCE AND DISCLOSURE: WHEN THE JUDGE FINDS THAT THE MEDICAL NOTES ARE NOT ACCURATE: “A CONTRIVED AND FALSE PIECE OF EVIDENCE”
In Biggadike v El Farra & Anor [2024] EWHC 1688 (KB) HHJ Carmel Wall (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that annotations made to medical records were not, in fact, contemporaneous. She rejected the second defendant’s evidence based on…
COST BITES 170: IF YOU MAKE AN APPLICATION, HAVE IT HEARD BUT WITHDRAW IT PRIOR TO JUDGMENT THEN YOU ARE PAYING ALL THE COSTS (ALTHOUGH NOT NECESSARILY ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS)
In Hill v Touchlight Genetics Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1801 Mrs Justice Joanna Smith considered issues relating to costs where the claimant abandoned her application to amend after the hearing, but prior to judgment. The judge held that the…
RESPONDENT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN WITNESS EVIDENCE WAS SERVED LATE: TO SHUT IT OUT FROM PRESENTING ITS BEST EVIDENCE WOULD BE “WHOLLY UNJUST AND DISPROPORTIONATE”
In Tanfield & Anor v Meadowbrook Montessori Ltd [2024] EWHC 1759 (Ch) ICC Judge Barber allowed a respondent’s application for relief from sanctions when witness evidence was served late. The Denton test was considered and, although the respondent could not…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE; JURISDICTION; DELAY AND DENTON – QUITE A LOT IN ONE CASE
There are a lot of issues in the judgment of Master Sullivan in Tradin Organic Agriculture BV v Gold Grain Gida Tarim Urunleri Sanayi Ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi [2024] EWHC 1562 (KB). Firstly whether the mixing up of pages in…
WITNESS STATEMENTS A GUIDE FOR GRADE C FEE EARNERS (AND THOSE WHO SUPERVISE THEM): WEBINAR 18th JULY 2024
On the 18th July I am giving a webinar “Drafting witness statements in high value personal injury claims: A guide for Grade C fee earners (and those who supervise them)”, booking details are available here. THE REASON FOR THE WEBINAR…
“CIVIL LITIGATION IN THE MODERN ERA REQUIRES THE PARTIES TO BEHAVE REASONABLY”, PARTY PENALISED IN COSTS FOR NOT AGREEING TO AN EXTENSION OF TIME
In Invenia Technical Computing Corporation & Anor v Hudson [2024] EWHC 1481 (KB) Mr Justice Knowles held that a party that had refused a reasonable request for an extension of time should pay the costs of that application. “……
FOUR WEBINARS ON FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION: CORONERS; RECENT CASES; CHILDREN AND FATAL CLAIMS & DAMAGES IN ANTICIPATION OF DEATH
There are four webinars over the next four weeks dealing with key elements of fatal accident litigation. An introduction to the coroner’s court for personal injury and clinical negligence lawyers 23rd July 2024 This webinar is an introduction to the…
CLAIMANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS IN SERVING NOTICE OF NON-ADMISSION OF AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS: THE APPLICATION WAS LATE, AND THE ARGUMENT WAS HOPELESS
In Invest Bank PSC v El-Husseini & Ors [2024] EWHC 1804 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver refused the claimant bank’s application for relief from sanctions when it served a notice of a notice to prove the authenticity of a document. The…
COST BITES 169: AN EXAMPLE OF A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN ACTION
There is an interesting example of a summary assessment of costs in action in the judgment of Mr Andrew Twigger KC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) in Wootton & Anor v Wootton & Ors (Re Costs)…
THE CLAIMANT HAD NOT SERVED THE CLAIM FORM PROPERLY: ORDER FOR SERVICE BY ALTERNATIVE MEANS WAS NOT EFFECTIVE WHEN THE DEFENDANT WAS RESIDENT ABROAD
In Broom v Aguilar [2024] EWHC 1764 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) decided that a claim form had not been properly served when it was served at a time that the defendant was living abroad….
COST (MEGA) BITES 168: AN EXHAUSTING READ (V): BUDGETS THAT ARE DESCRIBED AS “ABSURDLY HIGH”, “WHOLLY EXCESSIVE” AND WHICH “STRAINS ALL CREDULITY”
Unsurprisingly we are returning to the judgment in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB). The judges gave some examples of parts of the claimants’ budgets in particular that had been “overbudgeted”. They were not shy IN setting out their…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AND SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE: THE CLAIMANT “HAS ONLY HIMSELF TO BLAME” IN LOSING £1.2 MILLION IN DAMAGES
I am grateful to barrister Matthew Snarr for sending me a better copy of the judgments of HHJ Sephton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Shaw -v- Wilde, a copy of that judgment is available here Shaw v Wilde Final…
COST (MEGA) BITES 167: AN EXHAUSTING CASE (IV): “BUT YOURS IS NEARLY AS BIG AS MINE” IS NOT A GOOD ARGUMENT: COSTS BUDGETS COULD NOT BE COMPARED
We are continuing to look at the judgment in relation to the budgets in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB). In this post we are considering the argument that since claimants’ budget was very similar to the defendants’…
COST (MEGA) BITES 166: AN EXAUSTING CASE (iii): “THE CLAIMANTS’ APPROACH TO BUDGETING IS REDOLENT OF FINANCIAL INCONTINENCE”
The general observations made about the budgets in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB) is of importance. The court was particularly scathing of the claimants’ budget. It also rejected the claimants’ contention that the defendants’ budget had been artificially…
COST (MEGA) BITES 165: AN EXHAUSTING CASE (ii): PROPORTIONALITY WHERE THE CLAIMANTS CLAIM THE CASE IS WORTH £6 BILLION: THE PARTIES ARE NOT HANDED A BLANK CHEQUE FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECOVERABLE COSTS
We are continuing with the examination of the judgment of Mr Justice Constable and Senior Costs Judge Saker in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB). This time by looking at the court’s consideration of issues of proportionality when…
COST (MEGA) BITES 164: AN EXHAUSTING CASE:COSTS BUDGETING WHEN THE BUDGETS TOTAL £650 MILLION (1): GENERAL PRINCIPLES
The judgment of Mr Justice Constable sitting with Senior Costs Judge Saker in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB) contains much that is of interest to litigators. The judges budgeted a case where the claimants sought over £342…
COST BITES 163: NO DEDUCTION FROM SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT’S COSTS: A POINT OR TWO ABOUT “CLIENT’S” SUBMISSIONS
In McAteer v Hat & Mitre & Ors (Re Consequential Matters) [2024] EWHC 1746 (Ch) Sir Anthony Mann (sitting as a High Court Judge) dismissed the unsuccessful appellant’s application that the respondent’s costs be reduced. There were also some important…
IMPORTANT THINGS TO THINK ABOUT WHILE THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT IN MENZIES -v- OAKWOOD IS PENDING
The Court of Appeal decision in Menzies v Oakwood Solicitors Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 844 was appealed to the Supreme Court and was heard last week. The judgment is pending. In the interim period my colleague Matthew Smith suggests that claimant…
COST BITES 162: YOU CAN’T SEND SOMEONE TO PRISON FOR NOT PAYING YOUR COSTS – YOU REALLY CAN’T
In Smith v Kirkegaard [2024] EWCA Civ 698 the Court of Appeal found that it is not possible to imprison someone for contempt if they have failed to pay costs ordered during a court action. The judgment involves a look…
COSTS BITES 161: WHAT TYPE OF BILL IS THIS? STATUTE BILLS OR INTERIM BILLS? THE SOLICITOR COULD EASILY HAVE SOLVED THE PROBLEM BY CLEAR DRAFTING IN THE RETAINER
The importance of careful drafting in a client retainer can be seen in the judgment of Costs Judge Whalan in Stella v Hodge Jones & Allan LLP [2024] EWHC 1704 (SCCO). The case concerned an issue about whether interim bills…
SECRETARY OF STATE REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON A WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS SERVED LATE
In One Trees Estates Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWHC 1644 (Admin) Margaret Obi, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, refused the Secretary of State’s application for permission to…
COST BITES 160: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENTS AND THE IMPORTANCE OF “ESTIMATES” OF COSTS
We are looking for the third time at the judgment in St. James v Wilkin Chapman LLP [2024] EWHC 1716 (KB). One of the issues that the (former) client raised was the absence of any accurate estimate in relation to costs…
A MORE UNUSUAL “CLAIM FORM” ISSUE: CLAIMANT’S EARLIER UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPTS TO ISSUE WERE NOT EFFECTIVE AND ACTION WAS STATUTE BARRED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In Guo v Kinder & Others [2024] EWCA Civ 762 the Court of Appeal rejected an argument that the claimant’s earlier, unsuccessful, attempts to issue a claim form meant that the later claim form could be backdated. The action was,…
POSTMASTERS’ RIGHT TO RECOVER DAMAGES UNDER THE GLO COMPENSATION SCHEME DID NOT VEST IN TRUSTEES IN BANKRUPTCY
Normally when this blog looks at issues relating to insolvency it relates to procedural or other practical problems arising when a party is made insolvent. The judgment of HHJ Cawson KC in Secretary of State for Business and Trade v…
COST BITES 159: DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE GOLDEN RULE – THAT THE CLIENT SHOULD BE KEPT INFORMED
We are looking again at the judgment in St. James v Wilkin Chapman LLP [2024] EWHC 1716 (KB). The judge considered the question of whether the client had been informed that the budget had been exceeded and that the solicitors…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM – ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 6: YOU’RE SUING THE WRONG PARTY: THE LAW OF AMENDMENT AND MISTAKE CONSIDERED
NB AN APPEAL WAS ALLOWED IN THIS CASE SEE Bellway Homes Ltd v The Occupiers of Samuel Garside House [2025] EWCA Civ 1347 This is the sixth time we have looked at the judgment in Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v…
THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER (SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS): WEBINAR 15th JULY 2024
The previous post on the judgment in St. James v Wilkin Chapman LLP [2024] EWHC 1716 (KB) highlights the fact that great care is needed in entering into funding agreements with clients when the solicitor proposes to deduct costs from the…
COST BITES 158: SOLICITOR WAS ONLY ENTITLED TO SUCCESS FEE AND NO FURTHER COSTS: HIGH COURT DECISION ON APPEAL
In St. James v Wilkin Chapman LLP [2024] EWHC 1716 (KB) Mr Justice Constable allowed an appeal against a decision that a solicitor was entitled to deduct additional costs from the claimant’s damages. The judge held that the terms of…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM – ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 5: SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM LATE
This is the fifth time we have looked at the judgment in Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v Bellway Homes Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 1579 (KB). This time we look at another “trap for the unwary” – the Particulars of Claim were…
YOU SIGNED IT – YOU OWN IT: CLAIMANT IN £1.2 MILLION CLAIM FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST AND RECOVERS NOTHING
I am grateful to barrister Matthew Snarr for sending me a copy of the judgments of HHJ Sephton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Shaw -v- Wilde, copies of those judgments are available here shaw-v-wilde-judgment . I will…
COMPETENCES, CORONERS COURTS AND ADVOCACY: A REVIEW (AND A USEFUL WEBINAR ON THE 23rd JULY)
In 2021 a working group of legal professionals published a set of Competencies for practitioners working in the Coroners’ Courts, in addition to providing a useful toolkit. Concerns were raised following the experiences of the families of the victims of…
CLAIMANT FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: EXAGGERATING SYMPTOMS IS PLAINLY DISHONEST
We are returning to the judgment of HHJ Karen Walden-Smith in Hamed -v- Ministry of Justice (County Court in Cambridge – 7th June 2024). The judge found that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest in the presentation of their symptoms. This…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM – ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 4: NOW IT IS THE DEFENDANTS THAT HAVE MADE MISTAKES: AN IMPROPERLY SERVED CLAIM FORM IS NOT A NULLITY
NB AN APPEAL WAS ALLOWED IN THIS CASE SEE Bellway Homes Ltd v The Occupiers of Samuel Garside House [2025] EWCA Civ 1347 We are continuing with the judgment in Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v Bellway Homes Ltd & Anor [2024]…
AN EXPERT WHO SHOULD LEARN THE RULES BEFORE REPORTING AGAIN: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF
We are taking a short break from the detailed examination of issues relating to service of the claim form to look at another common issue on this blog – an expert that failed to comply with the rules. I am…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM – ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 3: AN ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN “RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS” IS FUTILE
NB AN APPEAL WAS ALLOWED IN THIS CASE SEE Bellway Homes Ltd v The Occupiers of Samuel Garside House [2025] EWCA Civ 1347 This is the third time (and not the last time) we are looking at the judgment of Occupiers of…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 2: HAVE YOU AGREED AN EXTENSION OF TIME? NO YOU HAVEN’T
NB AN APPEAL WAS ALLOWED IN THIS CASE SEE Bellway Homes Ltd v The Occupiers of Samuel Garside House [2025] EWCA Civ 1347 We are returning to the judgment of Master Dagnall in Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v Bellway Homes…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 1: LEAVING SERVICE UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE AND THEN NOT SERVING PROPERLY (BY FAX OR DX)
NB AN APPEAL WAS ALLOWED IN THIS CASE SEE Bellway Homes Ltd v The Occupiers of Samuel Garside House [2025] EWCA Civ 1347 The judgment of Master Dagnall in Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v Bellway Homes Ltd & Anor…
LOOKING BACK ELEVEN YEARS – THE LAST POST: LAWYERS LOOKING AFTER OURSELVES
This week we have looked back at some of the consistent topics on this blog over the past 11 years: expert evidence; witness statements; proving things, among them. I could have added many others: Part 36; service (or non-service) of…
CHOOSING ONE POST FROM THE “PROVING THINGS” SERIES: CLAIMANTS SEEK SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGES – BUT RECOVER £2.00
As part of the looking back series this week I have chosen a case from the “Proving things” series in June 2017. The post looked at the judgment of HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Jones -v- Oven…
WITNESS STATEMENTS DRAFTED BY LAWYERS: ANOTHER LOOK BACK
Yesterday I wrote about the large numbers of posts about expert witnesses on this blog. These are probably matched by the cases that deal with judicial criticism of witness statements. Again this is a topic where, in choosing one post,…
IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO USE PART 11 WHEN CHALLENGING A TRADE UNION’S RIGHT TO BRING AN ACTION FOR DEFAMATION
In Prospect v Evans [2024] EWHC 1533 (KB) Mrs Justice Steyn held that a challenge to a trade union’s right to bring defamation proceedings should not have been made by using Part 11. Part 11 applications deal with jurisdiction. The…
EXPERT EVIDENCE: AN EXAMPLE OF AN EXPERT BEING UNBALANCED (FROM 2015).
Looking back at previous posts there are, numerous, indeed hundreds, where the courts have considered the role of experts. The cases that appear on this blog tend to be where judges have found the experts wanting. It almost feels unfair…
EXPERT EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL STATE WHY THE JUDGE SHOULD BE WARY OF RELYING ON SCIENTIFIC PAPERS
In D and A (Fact-Finding : Research Literature) [2024] EWCA Civ 663 the Court of Appeal set out a clear warning about the dangers of trial judges analysing research literature in detail. The literature should be read through the prism…
THE ELEVENTH ANNIVERSARY OF CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF: A LOOK BACK TO THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY
Today marks the 11th anniversary of the setting up of this blog. Rather than review the previous decade I thought it would be a good time to repeat what I said on the first anniversary. The growth and size of…
ANOTHER BLOG FROM THE PAST: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “EVIDENCE” AND “SUBMISSIONS”: A PROBLEM THAT PERSISTS TODAY
As part of the 11th anniversary process I am looking at a blog that was written in June 2014. “WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE FOR FACTS: KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS (AND WHY IT MATTERS)”. It is very interesting to…
SUING THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE
Next week marks the 11th anniversary of this blog. I am reviewing key posts from the past. This was the second ever post on the 25th June 2013. The issues remain relevant. I have issued periodical reminders about this issue…
THE JUDGE HAD ADJOURNED THE HANDING DOWN OF A JUDGMENT AND RETAINED A DISCRETION OVER PERMISSION TO APPEAL: AN ISSUE LIKE LONDON BUSES – TWO ARRIVE ALMOST AT ONCE
I cannot recall a case where, in the space of a week, there have been two cases about the circumstances in which a trial judge can give permission to appeal after judgment has been handed down. The second for the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.