AVOIDING LIMITATION PROBLEMS AND THE (POSSIBLE) LIFELINE OF SECTION 33: WEBINAR 29th MAY 2024
Over the year this blog has recorded many cases of claimants (but not always claimants) coming to grief because of limitation issues. This webinar is designed to help practitioners avoid limitation problems, looking at major problem areas, common mistakes and…
COSTS BUDGETING: ESSENTIAL GUIDANCE FROM COSTS JUDGE BROWN
Costs Judge Simon Brown has produced a Note to assist in the case management and costs budgeting process in Kings Bench Division involving high value personal injury claim. The purpose of the Note is to “provide a neutral approach to…
COST BITES 151: DOES QOCS APPLY TO DETAILED ASSESSMENT? YES IT DOES – BUT THE DEFENDANT HAS PERMISSION TO APPEAL
In Challis v Bradpiece [2024] EWHC 1124 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered of whether a claimant had QOCS protection in detailed assessment. He concluded that the claimant continued to have costs protection. He accepted that the point was…
AN ACTION THAT HAS BEEN “WAREHOUSED” WILL NORMALLY BE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: COMPELLING REASONS TO THE CONTRARY ARE REQUIRED
In Watford Control Instruments Ltd v Brown [2024] EWHC 1125 (Ch) Mr Justice Richards struck out the claimants action on the grounds that it had “warehoused” the action for several years and this amounted to an abuse of process. Such…
CROSS-EXAMINING EXPERTS: USEFUL GUIDES AND HINTS
There are hundreds of posts on this blog about the role of experts in civil litigation. In many of those cases the experts have been cross-examined and this has not ended well – for them. I have already planned a…
ARGUING ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE BILL: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE DISCLOSURE OF AGENCY COSTS AND MEDICAL FEES WAR: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO COMPLY WITH PART 18 REQUESTS FOR A BREAKDOWN OF THE INVOICE
I am grateful to Ben Millns from Kennedys for sending me a copy of the decision in Parsons -v- Stevens, a copy of which is available here. Deputy District Judge Fentem decided that it was appropriate to make an order…
WHEN IS IT SENSIBLE TO APPLY TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM? NEVER – JUST NEVER: A CASE TO POINT
Yesterday, in a lecture I was giving about issues relating to service of the claim form, I was asked to address the issue of “when is it sensible to apply for an extension of time for service of the claim…
CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN YOU TELL A WHOPPER THE FIRST TIME AROUND – IT COMES BACK TO BITE YOU IN A SECOND TRIAL
In McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd v Shirayama Shokusan Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 1133 (Ch) Mr Justice Edwin Johnson found that a company had misrepresented its intention at a trial which involved, essentially, the claimant’s right to a new tenancy of business…
REDUCING THE RISKS OF ADVERSE COSTS ORDERS IN CIVIL LITIGATION: WEBINAR 20th MAY 2024
A costs order against your client is always a painful event. This webinar looks at the best and safest means of litigating to avoid costs orders against a claimant. It covers areas relating to extensions of time, relief from sanctions…
COST BITES 150: WAS THIS A COMPLIANT STATUTE BILL (NO IT WASN’T): PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS BEWARE
In Hensley v Morris Law Ltd [2024] EWHC 1101 (SCCO) Costs Judge Rowley held that a bill provided by a claimant’s solicitor to their client was not a compliant bill. It is a judgment that emphasises the importance of the…
COST BITES 149: SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT – WERE THESE STATUTE BILLS? (YES THEY WERE)
In Pickering v Thomas Mansfield Solicitors Ltd [2024] EWHC 1107 (SCCO) Costs Judge Brown found that a series of invoices rendered by the defendant solicitors were “statute bills”. He rejected an argument that the requirements for such bills had been…
A HANDY TIP FOR ANYONE GOING TO THE LEEDS BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURT ON MONDAY: THEY HAVE MOVED…
HMCTS have sent out notice that from Monday 13 May 2024, the Business and Property Court in Leeds will being hearing cases at its new base in West Gate, Grace Street, Leeds. The fourth-floor suite houses four courtrooms and is…
COSTS – WHEN YOU SOMETIMES THINK THE WORLD HAS GONE MAD: SPEND £28,535 TO CHALLENGE AN ATE PREMIUM OF £392…
In Bendriss v Nicholson Jones Sutton Solicitors Ltd [2024] EWHC 1100 (SCCO) Costs Judge Rowley dismissed a claimant’s application for specific disclosure. One notable aspect of the application was that the claimant had spent £28,535 in respect of this one application in…
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER 2024 : WEBINAR 13th MAY 2024
The making of an early Part 36 offer can cause major problems for claimants and their lawyers. An understanding of the rules, the relevant cases and the steps that need to be taken when a Part 36 offer is made…
DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: AN APPLICATION TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION SHOULD BE DONE PROMPTLY
In Ibrahim v AXA Belgium [2024] EWHC 856 (KB) Master Fontaine refused the defendant’s application for an extension of time to dispute the jurisdiction. The defendant should have applied within 14 days of acknowledging service, it took 30. The defendant’s…
“GOOGLESPOOFING” AND THIRD PARTY DISCLOSURE: DEFENDANT FAILS TO PERSUADE THE COURT THAT RECORDINGS ARE NECESSARY
In Parker v Skyfire Insurance Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 1060 (KB) Mrs Justice Dias dismissed a defendant’s appeal against a refusal to give disclosure of documents of a third party car hire company. The documents were not necessary to dispose…
EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY TORTURE: THE JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE AND THE SUPREME COURT DECISION
The question of whether evidence obtained by torture in civil proceedings is one that, thankfully, rarely comes before the court. However it was an issue considered in the judgment of Mr Justice Knowles MBE In Shangang Shipping Company Ltd -v-…
IS A PARTY ENTITLED TO SEE THEIR OPPONENT’S CORRESPONDENCE WITH AN EXPERT LEADING UP TO THE JOINT MEETING? AN ISSUE THAT IS IMPORTANT – BUT UNDECIDED
In Frasers Group plc v Saxo Bank AS & Anor [2024] EWHC 188 (Comm) HHJ Pelling KC considered issues relating to whether a party’s correspondence with their expert leading up to the joint meeting of experts should be disclosed. The…
INCREASE IN COURT FEES FROM THE 1ST MAY 2024
Court fees increased from the 1st May. Details of all court fees increased can be seen here. The increases apply in family and tribunal proceedings in addition to civil cases. 172 court fees have been increased by 10%. Here we…
SILENCE IN THE FACE OF AN OFFER TO MEDIATE CAN HAVE AN IMPACT ON COSTS: ONCE AN OFFER TO MEDIATE IS MADE THE BALL IS IN THE RECIPIENT’S COURT
In Northamber PLC v Genee World Ltd & Ors (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 428 the Court of Appeal reiterated certain key points about a party refusing to mediate. Silence in the face of an offer to mediate can have an…
REMISSION TO THE COUNTY COURT: WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
In Sherman & Anor v Reader Offers Ltd (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 412 the Court of Appeal set out the limits that exist when a case is remitted to the county court for an assessment of damages following a successful…
ANOTHER PART 8 CASE THAT HAS TO GO TO PART 7: THE RISK THAT THE COURT WILL MAKE “ILL-INFORMED DECISIONS THAT WILL NOT FINALLY DISPOSE OF THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PARTIES”
In TClarke Contracting Ltd v Bell Build Ltd [2024] EWHC 992 (TCC) Mr Justice Pepperall decided that an action, commenced under Part 8, must proceed under Part 7. “In my judgment, the proposed use of the Part 8 procedure in…
WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: SOME KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL LINKS
Earlier today I gave a webinar on “What to do when things go wrong in litigation”, this was immediately before I went to court to argue a case which, among other things, related to extensions of time to serve the…
“LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING”: A REPEAT, BUT AN IMPORTANT ONE
In assessing a case, and the evidence of both sides, litigators have to be aware of the process of “litigation wishful thinking”. Witnesses may be perfectly honest, but their memories as to what happened are influenced by what they wish would have…
AVOIDING MISTAKES WHEN DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: WEBINAR 9th MAY 2024
Judges regularly complain that witness statements are inadequate and do not contain sufficient information, alternatively that they contain much information that is irrelevant and the witness is unable to give. This webinar looks at how practitioners can avoid basic errors…
MANCHESTER IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE VENUE FOR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN NORFOLK: THE CASE GOES SOUTH…
In Bartosik, R (On the Application Of) v Office of the Police & Crime Commissioner for Norfolk [2024] EWHC 932 (Admin) Mr Justice Fordham held that the Administrative Court in Manchester is not the appropriate venue for a dispute over…
THE DANGERS OF RUNNING UP TO DEADLINES AND LEAVING MATTERS LATE FOR COMPLIANCE: DEFENDANT HAD FAILED TO FILE WITH COURT ORDERS: REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS UPHELD ON APPEAL
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Jaiyesimi v Kukoyi [2024] EWHC 164 (KB) has many important lessons for litigators. Firstly the need for the fee to be paid in order that an application is properly made. Secondly the dangers…
PROVING THINGS 238: TAX AND FILMS: A DANGEROUS MIX – BUT THE CLAIMANTS FAILED TO PROVE THEY HAD LOST ANYTHING
In Upham & Ors v HSBC UK Bank PLC [2024] EWHC 849 (Comm) Mr Justice Bright considered the losses said to be suffered by a number of claimants who had invested in a tax deferment scheme. Most of the claimants…
DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM STRUCK OUT BECAUSE THE DEFENDANT RELIED ON WITHOUT PREJUDICE COMMUNICATIONS
In West v Churchill & Anor [2024] EWHC 940 (Ch) HHJ Keyser KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) struck out a defence and counterclaim that referred to without prejudice negotiations and correspondence. There had been no agreement reached between…
LAWYERS MUST LIKE LIVING DANGEROUSLY: APPLICATION MADE THREE MINUTES BEFORE DEADLINE: THE CLAIMANT SCRAPES HOME…
In Lloyds Developments Ltd v Accor HotelServices UK Ltd [2024] EWHC 941 (TCC) Mrs Justice Jefford considered a claimant’s application for an extension of time to comply with a peremptory order which was made 3 minutes prior to the time…
COST BITES 148: THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ORDER COSTS TO BE PAID IMMEDIATELY AFTER A TRIAL ON LIABILITY
In Lorimer-Wing v Hashmi [2024] EWHC 931 (Ch) Mr Justice Edwin Johnson upheld a decision that a defendant should pay costs forthwith following a trial of a preliminary issue at which the claimant was successful. “The difficulty which confronts…
A SHOUT OUT FOR THE TECHNICAL CREW: BIG YELLOW WORKSHOP
A week or so ago this blog disappeared. Well the blog was still here but every word of content had gone. The technical problem that caused this was solved within hours by my friends at the Big Yellow Workshop. What…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: WEBINAR 30th APRIL 2024
This blog often looks at cases where litigation has gone wrong, be it limitation, service or someone falling foul of the rules or court orders. One of the saddest aspects of many of these cases is that if prompt and…
ATTEMPTS TO RE-OPEN ISSUES WHEN A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT: COURT OF APPEAL SAYS NOT AN INVITATION TO RE-ARGUE THE ISSUES
In Supponor Ltd & Anor v AIM Sport Development AG [2024] EWCA Civ 396 the Court of Appeal resisted attempts (by both parties) to re-open key issues after a draft judgment had been sent out. “The primary purpose of this…
A COURT CANNOT SIMPLY IGNORE AN UNCHALLENGED EXPERT REPORT: DOG SAVED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
The significance of unchallenged expert evidence at court was considered by the Administrative Court in Fitzgerald v CPS [2024] EWHC 869 (Admin). Although this is a criminal case it considers the authorities in civil actions and the central point that…
TRYING TO SQUEEZE A PART 7 CASE INTO A PART 8 APPLICATION: DISPUTES OF FACT MAKE PART 8 UNSUITABLE
In ISG Retail Ltd v FK Construction Ltd [2024] EWHC 878 (TCC) Neil Moody KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered the question of whether a case was suitable for Part 8 determination. He decided that there were…
PROCEDURE, DAMAGES, LIABILITY, COSTS AND LIMITATION: A SERIES OF WEBINARS THIS YEAR AIMING TO HELP AVOID OR DEAL WITH PROBLEMS IN LITIGATION
The issues arising from many of the cases looked at on this blog are being considered in a series of webinars starting later this month. The webinars cover many of the problem areas of litigation: what to do when things…
WHEN CAN A CLAIM FORM INCLUDE MULTIPLE PARTIES? COURT OF APPEAL REACH BACK TO THE OLD RULES TO HELP
Yesterday I wrote about a case where a judge made strict case management orders in an attempt to deal with an action brought by multiple claimants. The issue of multiple parties was considered today by the Court of Appeal in…
DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSION MADE IN THE PORTAL: ON CONDITION THAT INTERIM PAYMENTS WOULD NOT BE REPAID
I am grateful to solicitor Stratos Gatzouris from DWF law for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Catherine Brown in the case of Jerrom -v- Serco Leisure Operating Ltd (Canterbury County Court 12th February 2023). It is an…
TOO MANY PARTIES CAN INCUR THE COURT’S WRATH: THE DIFFICULTIES IN PLEADING A CASE WHERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE CLAIMANTS
In Niprose Investments Ltd & Ors v Vincents Solicitors Ltd (Professional negligence) [2024] EWHC 801 (Ch) HHJ Hodge KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered some of the issues where 35 claimants attempted to plead their claim on one…
COST BITES 147: WHO IS THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY? WHAT SUMS SHOULD BE DEDUCTED FOR LOSING ON CERTAIN POINTS? DOES A CALDERBANK OFFER MATTER?
In South Tees Development Corporation & Anor v PD Teesport Ltd [2024] EWHC 842 (Ch) Mr Justice Rajah determined issues relating to the costs of an action where the defendant had been largely successful. A Calderbank offer from the Defendant,…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM AND SUBMISSIONS TO THE JURISDICTION: SOMETHING ABOUT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS TOO
In Moonbug Entertainment Ltd v CCM Touring LLC & Anor [2024] EWHC 793 (Comm) Mr Justice Andrew Baker found that the defendants had submitted to the jurisdiction by their conduct. Further the defendants required relief from sanctions. The judge held…
DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST SOME, BUT NOT ALL, DEFENDANTS: WHEN SHOULD THE COURT ENTER JUDGMENT FOR A SPECIFIED SUM?
In Justice Investments Ltd v Visalia Enegia SL (t/a Nace) [2024] EWHC 815 (KB) Master Dagnall considered the question of whether judgment in default should be entered for a specified sum. The Master held that the fact that the claimant…
COST BITES 146: LITIGANT IN PERSON (USING DIRECT ACCESS COUNSEL) WAS TO FILE A COSTS BUDGET
In Cotham School v Bristol City Council & Ors (Ruling on Costs Budgeting) [2024] EWHC 824 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) stated that a litigant in person was to provide a costs budget. The litigant…
COST BITES 145: AGENCY SHOULD PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF FIGURES FOR COST OF A MEDICAL REPORT: “ANY AJUDICATION ON PROPORTIONALITY, IN ALL ITS COMPONENT PARTS, DEMANDS TRANSPARENCY”
I am grateful to barrister James Miller for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Saggerson in Amini-Edu -v- Esure Insurance Company Ltd (8th March 2024). A copy of the transcript is available here. ENA AMINU-EDU COSTS JUDGMENT…
COST BITES 144: SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, REDUCED FROM £42,267 TO £22,000: A CASE IN POINT
One of the aims of this series is to look at costs issues that would not normally be examined. This is so practitioners can get a “feel” as to what actually goes on in court. A good example of this…
THE KEY CASES IN FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES: WEBINAR 19TH APRIL 2024
The means of assessment of fatal accident damages is not set out in the Fatal Accident Act, but is set out in case law. A knowledge of the case law is essential to all those involved in fatal accident litigation. …
THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES
The Guideline Hourly Rates changed on 1st January 2026. These are set out below. The 2025 and 2024 rates can be found underneath. Guideline hourly rates 2026 (with previous year’s rates in brackets) Grade Fee Earner London 1 London 2…
COURT WOULD NOT SET ASIDE FINAL ORDER FOR DIVORCE CAUSED BY A SOLICITORS ERROR: IT IS MORE THAN A SIMPLE CLICK OF A MOUSE
In Williams v Williams [2024] EWHC 733 (Fam) Sir Andrew McFarlane refused to set aside a final divorce order when the order had been made due to a mistake by the applicant’s solicitors. It is a clear example of the…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: “SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE” CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In the judgment given today in Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC 806 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie dismissed the claimant’s claim as being fundamentally dishonest. The judgment contains a detailed consideration of the issues relating to the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.