THE QUESTION OF THE CLAIMANT’S CAPACITY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH AS A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: THE COURT SHOULD APPOINT A LITIGATION FRIEND – THIS DOES NOT PREJUDICE THE DEFENDANT’S POSITION
Here we have a case where a defendant appealed against a decision it agreed with. The judge found that the claimant had capacity and did not require a Litigation Friend. However the defendant’s issue was with the very decision to…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: EXHIBITS: A REMINDER OF THE RULES, WHERE THINGS GO WRONG AND HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS
The “exhibiting” of documents to witness statements and affidavits is common. It is surprising how common it is for the exhibit, and the witness statement, to fail to comply with the rules. Here we look at the rules relating to…
COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 2: POOR COSTS INFORMATION: NOT INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT COSTS UNTIL TWO YEARS INTO THE RETAINER…
We are taking a close look at several Legal Ombudsman decisions in relation to costs, more particularly information about costs in litigation. Here the firm of solicitors did not provide any information about potential costs for a year after being…
COST BITES 361: THE STEPS A CLAIMANT SHOULD TAKE IF THEY WISH TO RECOVER PRE-ALLOCATION COSTS ON THE BASIS THAT THE CASE WOULD HAVE PROCEEDED IN THE FAST TRACK
I am grateful to Andrew Hogan for sending me a copy of this decision which relates to pre-allocation costs in housing cases. It deals with the question of how the court should address pre-allocation costs where a housing disrepair claim…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: LITIGATION: WHAT IS AN APPROPRIATE CASE LOAD – AND IS IT IMPORTANT? (MARCH 2016)
Here is a post from a decade ago with an issue that remains just as relevant today. What is an appropriate case load for litigators? How do we find the balance between economic survival and overloading, stress and the major…
COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 1 : WHILST COSTS CAN BE DIFFICULT TO PREDICT THE FIRM SHOULD HAVE PROVIDED AN ESTIMATE BASED ON THEIR PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE…
We continue with our examination of recent Legal Ombudsman decisions in relation to providing estimates of costs in particular. Here we have a finding that the information given as to the costs of litigation was inadequate. “Whilst I appreciate…
THE DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DANGERS OF TRYING SIMILAR THINGS A SECOND TIME AROUND: “THE HENDERSON AND HUNTER PRINCIPLES APPLY TO INTERLOCUTORY HEARINGS AS MUCH AS TO FINAL HEARINGS”
This is an interesting case on the relevance of the “Henderson” principles to applications, in this case for reverse summary judgment/to strike out the claim. A similar application had been made much earlier in the litigation. The judge found for…
EXPERT WATCH 39: WHEN THE HOME SECRETARY DID NOT CHALLENGE EXPERT EVIDENCE SHE CANNOT BE THAT SURPRISED WHEN THE COURT ACCEPTS IT
We are looking at another case where a party failed to challenge expert evidence. The Court of Appeal was clear in its view that if fault lay anywhere it was with the appellant’s failure to challenge the expert evidence that…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY II: WITNESS CREDIBILITY: THE PRINCIPLES IN TUI -V- GRIFFITHS DID NOT IMPACT ON THE ASSESSMENT OF A LAY WITNESS
Here we have an unusual argument where an appellant attempted to use the decision in Tui -v- Griffiths to argue that a tribunal should not have accepted the evidence of a lay witness. The evidence of the witness in question…
COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ABOUT LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER LEADING TO CLAIMANT BEING ENTITLED TO COSTS TO BE ASSESSD
It is a busy day for Court of Appeal decisions on procedure. Here we have an important judgment on Part 36. What are the costs consequences if a defendant makes a Part 36 offer when the case is subject to…
IMPORTANT COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: A CLAIM IS BROUGHT WHEN A CLAIM FORM IS SENT TO THE COURT EVEN IF IT DOES NOT HAVE THE CORRECT ISSUE FEE
This Court of Appeal decision today clarifies the position when a claimant files a claim at court but mistakenly does not pay the correct fee. The Court held that the claim was “delivered” when the claim was filed at court….
CCC AND LOST YEARS IN THE SUPREME COURT: THE POTENTIAL STING IN THE TAIL FOR CLAIMANTS: “WAGES IN HEAVEN SHOULD NOT BE AWARDED WHEN THEY ARE NEEDED ON EARTH”
Here we are looking at some of the observations made by Lord Burrows in the recent judgment given by the Supreme Court. In the short term it is good news for seriously injured child claimants. However Lord Burrows has laid…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: EVIDENCE BY VIDEO LINK ALLOWED: IS THERE A GOOD REASON, DOES IT SERVE A LEGITIMATE AIM & IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE?
Here we have an unusual issue in an unusual (but high profile) case. The question was whether a witness could be permitted to give evidence by video link in circumstances where he was unable to attend court, but it was…
MAZUR MATTERS 53: JUDGE REFUSES TO GRANT A SPECIFIC OR GENERAL EXEMPTION TO AN EXPERIENCED LEGAL EXECUTIVE
One of the issues that has followed the Mazur decision arises from the fact that the statute gives the court a power to grant an exemption. Here the judge considered whether the power to grant an exemption should be granted…
SERVICE POINTS 29: WOULD THE COURT STRIKE OUT THE ACTION WHEN THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO COMPLY WITH A r. 7.7 NOTICE?
It is unusual to see cases about the operation of CPR 7.7. This rule allows a defendant to serve a notice requiring that a claim form be served. In this case the claimant did not comply and the defendant applied…
A PART 36 OFFER CANNOT BE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE PLEADINGS: NOR CAN THE OFFEROR ARGUE THAT IT WAS NOT, IN FACT, A PART 36 OFFER AT ALL
Here we have a case where the defendant argued that a second action against it by a claimant was an abuse of process because an earlier action had settled by way of the claimant accepting a Part 36 offer. The…
THE SECRETARY OF STATE REQUIRED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “AN APPALLING MANIFESTATION OF A LAX CULTURE OF NON-COMPLIANCE”
For (at least) the third time in recent weeks we are considering defaults or mistakes made on behalf of a Secretary of State. The delays and mistakes here were manifold. The Secretary of State was fortunate in obtaining an extension…
ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF APPLICANT’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH A PEREMPTORY ORDER: (THIS MAY WAKE YOU UP ON A MONDAY MORNING…)
Here we have a case, brought be a professional liquidator, which was struck out because of a failure to comply with a peremptory order as to disclosure. It serves as an object lesson in the need to educate a client…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TOP RIGHT HAND CORNER OF ANY WITNESS STATEMENT OR AFFIDAVIT
Here we are looking at one of the basic rules for witness statements. Curiously it is ignored in about 40 – 50% of the statements I see in practice. Often the oversight is ignored. Some judges take a hard line….
EXPERT WATCH 39: BOTH EXPERTS “ACTED AS SURROGATE ADVOCATES ON BEHALF OF THEIR INSTRUCTING PARTY”: MORE LESSONS TO BE LEARNT…
We have another High Court decision where the judge was highly critical of the approach of each expert. The judge found that each took on the role of advocate rather than expert. The criticisms are stark “they were similar in…
HOW FAR IS A CIVIL COURT BOUND (IF AT ALL) BY THE CONCLUSIONS IN ANOTHER CIVIL MATTER? THE ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
Can a judge take into account findings of fact in a “related” civil action? That is the matter being considered here. The judge had to consider whether factual findings as to the employment status of the petitioner in Employment Tribunal…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE COURT OF APPEAL ON THE CREDIBILITY OF AN EXPERT WHO HAD HIDDEN THE FACT THAT THEY HAD BEEN A COLLEAGUE OF THE DEFENDANT (FEBRUARY 2017)
Here we look at a case where the Court of Appeal addressed the issue of witness credibility head on. An expert giving evidence for the defendant in a clinical negligence case failed to disclose the fact that he and the…
COST BITES 360: THE COURT DOES HAVE POWER TO ORDER SECURITY FOR COSTS IN A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: HOWEVER IT MADE AN ORDER FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT INSTEAD
Here we have a case that it about the complex “fall out” following funding of litigation by litigation funders. The claimant sought an assessment of costs on the basis that it may have an interest in the sums being sought….
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 59: IT IS TOO LATE TO RAISE THIS NOW: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO RELY ON AMENDED PLEADINGS EVEN THOUGH THEY DID NOT HAVE PERMISSION TO DO SO
Here we have a case where the claimant amended his pleading extensively, going beyond the limited permission that the court had granted. The defendants noted that and objected to it, however they did nothing about it for 10 months. At…
EXPERT WATCH 38: AN EXPERT HAD NOT BREACHED THEIR DUTY BY ACCEPTING LIMITED INSTRUCTIONS: BUT WHEN SHOULD AN EXPERT REFUSE INSTRUCTIONS?
Here we are considering some important observations in relation to the duties of an expert who is given limited instructions. The judge considered whether this involved a breach of the expert’s duty to the court. On the facts of this…
COST BITES 359: A SOLICITOR’S FAILURE TO SIGN THE COSTS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY DID NOT RENDER THE BILL INVALID (THIS MAY EXPLAIN WHY BIRMINGHAM COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE ANY MONEY…)
Here we have an appeal by a paying party on a highly technical point. The appeal failed. It highlights the dangers of (i) permitting a default certificate to be entered; (ii) taking technical points which (as the Court observed) led…
COST BITES 358: WHAT DOES THE COURT DO IF THE PARTIES HAVE COMPROMISED AN APPLICATION BUT CANNOT AGREE ON WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS?
There are occasions where the parties agree the terms of an application but cannot agree who should pay the costs – the court is asked to adjudicate. There are difficulties for the judge in this situation. In particular judges are…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 58: THE DEFENDANTS’ PLEADING DID NOT CONTAIN AN “ADMISSION”: APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AMENDMENTS DISMISSED
This is a case where the court had to consider whether a defence had originally contained an “admission” such that the defendants required express permission to resile from it. The court found that, on close analysis, there was no such…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A WITNESS STATEMENT “MADE UP OF SUBMISSIONS OR COMMENTARY ON DOCUMENTS RATHER THAN EVIDENCE”
There are numerous warnings and strictures about not putting submissions, commentary and opinion in witness statements. More than one observer has commented that these rules are routinely ignored. We have examples of this here. We also have an example of…
COST BITES 359: FAILING TO SIGN CONSENT ORDER LEADS TO £44,000 IN COSTS: “GOING SILENT” IS NOT A CHEAP OPTION…
Just a quick warning here about the costs of not signing a consent order having agreed to so something. It can be expensive. We have a case here where it cost £44,000 when the claimant made an application because the…
COST BITES 358: JUDGE DOES NOT AWARD COSTS ON AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL BECAUSE THE RESPONDENT (INITIALLY) ASKED FOR TOO MUCH
It is not unusual for a party, on an interlocutory application, to put in a schedule of costs that covers the entire action. Sometimes this is justified, often it is not. Here we have a case where this backfired. The initial…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 57: A CASE ALLEGING PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE AGAINST A SOLICITOR WAS NOT ADEQUATELY PLEADED
We are looking at the same case as in the earlier post, but from a different angle. The case has some particular pleading points. The claimant pleaded that the solicitor was negligent in not instructing counsel, but did not plead that…
PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS: A SOLICITOR WAS NOT NEGLIGENT IN ADVISING THE CLAIMANT TO SETTLE: NEITHER COUNSEL’S ADVICE NOR AN EXPERT REPORT WERE NECESSARY
Fortunately for the courts and legal system most civil cases settle. Advising on settlement terms carries some risks, and requires a high level of judgment. Some clients will be dissatisfied with the settlement reached and blame the lawyers involved for…
MAZUR MATTERS 50: THE CALM BEFORE THE STORM: GETTING READY FOR THE APPEAL THIS AFTERNOON: BUT IF YOU WANT TO WATCH – YOU HAVE TO ASK…
The appeal in the decision of Mazur -v- Charles Russell Speechlys LLP begins at 2.00 today, it continues on Wednesday and Thursday. It is not being live streamed (To be fair I have been sent a link – the Court…
![PART 36 ISSUES: CAN A JUDGE CONSIDER INTEREST UNDER PART 36 WHEN INTEREST HAD BEEN AN ISSUE DETERMINED IN THE ACTION? [SPOILER - YES THEY CAN]](https://i0.wp.com/www.civillitigationbrief.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Par36Interest.png?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
PART 36 ISSUES: CAN A JUDGE CONSIDER INTEREST UNDER PART 36 WHEN INTEREST HAD BEEN AN ISSUE DETERMINED IN THE ACTION? [SPOILER – YES THEY CAN]
The judgment here considers an interesting point in relation to Part 36. The judge had, in the substantive judgment, considered issues relating to the interest to be paid by the defendant. The defendant had failed to beat a Part 36…
EXPERT WATCH 37: THE COURT SHOULD MAKE FINDINGS OF FACT FIRST AND NOT ABDICATE THIS TASK TO AN EXPERT: A FIRST INSTANCE DECISION WITH A “FUNDAMENTAL FLAW”
We are looking at a family law case which considers several significant aspects of expert evidence. Firstly it makes clear that it is not for an expert to make findings of fact. Further a judge cannot simply abdicate they key…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN WHEN A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SIGNS THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: A STARK REMINDER
There are major dangers when a lawyer signs a statement of truth on behalf of their client. I had actually planned a post on this issue before seeing the judgment last week which features below.. For many years this site…
COST BITES 357: DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER’S FEE? NOTE OF THE JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (AND THAT PERENNIAL ISSUE OF WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED…)
I am grateful to Ben Williams KC for sending me a note of the judgment yesterday which was the appeal against the decision in Santiago v Motor Insurers’ Bureau (The County Court at Central London, 22nd February 2025). The second time…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 56: SHOULD THE COURT STRIKE OUT THE ACTION WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAS PLEADED FALSE FACTS IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM ?
We are continuing to look at an unusual case in relation to pleadings. The claimant had pleaded false matters in the Particulars of Claim and admitted their falsity. The defendant applied to strike out the entire action. This judgment looks…
MORE DECISIONS ABOUT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND “HALLUCINATED” CASES: THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IS FAR FROM HAPPY: LEGAL PROFESSIONALS WHO DELEGATE THEIR WORK REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING ITS ACCURACY
As I’ve said before the hallucinated cases just keep on coming. The issues were considered by the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) here. There are important points about the need to supervise staff who undertake legal research. It is…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 55: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM CONTAINED A (SIGNIFICANTLY) FALSE FACT: JUDGE FINDS THAT THIS WAS PRINCIPALLY DUE TO THE FAULT OF “BARRISTER M”
It is rare for a judgment about pleadings to be “gripping” reading. We have such a case here. From the opening lines, to the detailed consideration of how the pleadings went wrong, the narrative is compelling. We even have an…
COST BITES 356: DO FIXED COSTS APPLY WHEN THE CASE IS TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM A FIXED COSTS REGIME TO ONE WHERE COSTS ARE “AT LARGE”
Here we are considering a Court of Appeal decision about what costs order should be made when an action is transferred from a fixed costs regime to one where costs are at large. On the face of it the decision…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: “STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR: SHARING THE PAIN” (FEBRUARY 2020) (WITH LINKS TO THE WHOLE SERIES)
In this series I always try to look at posts that remain relevant today. This post, indeed the series it was in from 2019 – 2020, clearly remain topical. The Law Society Gazette last week reported that a record number…
LIMITATION IN ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSE CASES: THE COURT DECLINED TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION UNDER S.33 “THE DELAY HAS ALREADY SIGNIFICANTLY UNDERMINED THE COGENCY OF THE EVIDENCE ABOUT WHETHER THE ABUSE TOOK PLACE AT ALL”
Here we have a case where the court refused to exercise its discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act in relation to allegations of sexual abuse that took place in the 1980s. As the judgment notes this is an…
SERVICE POINTS 28 : EFFECTIVE SERVICE ON A RESIDENCE IN ENGLAND COULD NOT TAKE PLACE WHEN THE DEFENDANT WAS IN FACT ABROAD – AND LEGALLY PREVENTED FROM RETURNING
We are looking at a Court of Appeal judgment today which overturned a finding that a defendant had been properly served at an address in England. The defendant was not living in England when proceedings were served and, indeed, there…
THE USE OF AI FOR PREPARING COURT DOCUMENTS: READ THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL INTERIM REPORT AND CONSULTATION
The Civil Justice Council has produced an interim report and consultation document on the use of AI for preparing Court documents. This is worthwhile reading. It summarises many of the current issues “Artificial intelligence (“AI”) has enormous potential to be…
PROVING THINGS 281:THE CCC CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT: LOSS OF EARNINGS AND CHILDREN: “THE COURT MUST ASSESS DAMAGES AS BEST IT CAN ON SUCH EVIDENCE AS IS REASONABLY AVAILABLE”
One of the things that the judgment in CCC -v- Sheffield has done is to highlight the issues relating to proving loss of earnings claims in relation to children. Indeed this difficulty in establishing such losses was a major issue…
CASE FAILED BECAUSE CLAIMANTS’ SOLICITORS ATTEMPTED TO ISSUE USING THE WRONG METHOD: THE DANGERS OF LEAVING THINGS TO THE LAST MINUTE
There are always profound dangers in leaving the issue of proceedings to the last minute. This case illustrates that danger. The claimants left it to days before the expiry of the limitation period before applying to issue. They used the…
COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWS APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT: THE APPELLANTS HAD NEVER BREACHED A PEREMPTORY ORDER: HOW “UNLESS ORDERS” SHOULD BE CONSTRUED
For the second time this month we are looking at a successful appeal against the construction of an “unless” order. In both cases the judges below had found that the appellants had breached the order. In both cases that finding…
LOST YEARS DAMAGES AND THE CHILD CLAIMANT: JUDGMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT TODAY
The judgment of the Supreme Court today considered whether “lost years” damages should be awarded to a young child. The Court, by a majority, allowed the claimant’s appeal and held that damages should be awarded in these circumstances. This post…
You must be logged in to post a comment.