PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
Assessing claims for loss of earnings for children is always difficult. The importance of this has become, if anything, more acute given the Supreme Court decision in CCC (by her mother and litigation friend MMM) (Appellant) v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals…
“GUIDE, MENTOR AND FRIEND”: REVIEW OF THE APIL GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS 4th EDITION: STUART McKECHNIE KC (AND A FORMIDABLE TEAM): THE “LITTLE GEM” THAT KEEPS ON GIVING
The fundamental question for a reviewer of a legal text is – is this book worthwhile? Here there is only one answer. A book of considerable importance, assistance and utility is a “must buy”. HOW DO I SUMMARISE THIS? Sir…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: BOTH WITNESSES ARE HONEST AND BELIEVE THEY ARE TELLING THE TRUTH – BUT ONE IS WRONG…
It is often the case that the most difficult cases are those that depend almost wholly on witness recollection. This is made far more difficult in a case such as a motor accident where the incident happened in a matter…
PROVING THINGS 285: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: “IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH QOCS TO EXTEND IT TO CLAIMANTS WHO KNOWINGLY TELL UNTRUTHS ABOUT SOMETHING FUNDAMENTAL TO THEIR CLAIM…”
This is a judgment on fundamental dishonesty where the judge considers, in some detail, the burden of proof and what a defendant needs to establish. There are important observations about the burden of proof and consideration of the term “dishonesty”…
PROVING THINGS 283: FAILING TO ESTABLISH A CLAIM FOR PROVISIONAL DAMAGES FOR ONE SET OF SYMPTOMS BUT ESTABLISHING IT IN ANOTHER
There are relatively few judgments in which the law and practice relating to provisional damages are considered in detail. We have such a case here. Further it is an example of the claimant failing to establish provisional damages in relation…
PROVING THINGS 282: THE INJURED CLAIMANT ADDUCED NO EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE (SOMETHING ABOUT PLEADINGS TOO…)
Here we look at a Privy Council decision in a personal injury case. The claimant lost at first instance, the defendant having elected to call no evidence. What is interesting about this case is the constant motif in the judgment…
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 29th APRIL 2026
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Attersley v UK Insurance Ltd has sharpened the costs risks faced by claimants who accept a Part 36 offer outside the relevant period. While a claimant who accepts late remains subject to fixed recoverable costs…
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…
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…
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…
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…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 11: THE LOCAL AUTHORITY COULD NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PERSONAL INJURY TRUSTS AND REFUSE TO PROVIDE CARE
Here was have a case where the local authority ceased providing funds for a seriously injured person, indeed they demanded money back. The local authority contended that money in a personal injury trust should properly be taken into account. Further…
DEFENDANTS GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE SERVED LATE: EVEN THOUGH THIS LED TO THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE TRIAL
A defendant that wishes to rely on surveillance evidence must choose its timing with extreme care. If the evidence is disclosed too early then the claimant could be “tipped off”; too late and this could be categorised as an “ambush”. …
SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON SPECIFIC ISSUES: WHEN SHOULD A “COMPELLING REASON” PREVENT JUDGMENT BEING GIVEN? (NOT HERE…)
One ground for resisting an application for summary judgment is that there is a “compelling reason why the case or issue should be disposed of at trial”. It is unusual for the issue of a “compelling reason” to be considered,…
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE
A perennial problem for litigators is the situation where a claimant has a good case but the Defendant is impecunious and uninsured. In many (but not all) motor claims the Motor Insurers Bureau will provide a practical remedy. In all…
INTEREST RATE DECREASED ON THE COURT FUNDS OFFICE SPECIAL AND BASIC ACCOUNTS: THE AMOUNTS AND A REMINDER OF A USEFUL ONLINE TOOL
The interest rates payable on Court Fund accounts have decreased. THE CHANGES The changes are announced here. They took effect on the 9th January 2026. Special Account – decreased from 4.00% to 3.75% Basic Account – decreased from 3.00%…
COST BITES 314: PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT IN THE RTA PROTOCOL: CLAIMANT LIMITED TO FIXED COSTS
This is the second case today that was sent in by a helpful reader. I am grateful to Ben Millns from Kennedys who has sent me a copy of this judgment. It relates to the question of whether a personal…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 42: THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A “DENIAL”: DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE CASE WAS PLEADED
This is the first of two interesting cases today that have been sent in by readers. I am grateful to Rebecca McVety of the Dental Law Partnership for sending me this judgment which deals with pleadings, in particular the very…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 41: HAD THE DEFENDANT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY?
A party alleging fraud or dishonesty cannot “ambush” their opponent at trial. Fraud must be fully particularised and pleaded. Do identical principles apply to allegations of fundamental dishonesty? In this case the judge considered an argument that points in relation…
ANOTHER “HALLUCINATED” AUTHORITIES CASE: A FALSE CITATION AUTHORED OR REVIEWED BY A LAWYER WITHOUT ATTRIBUTION CAN STILL BE SUBJECT TO REFERENCE FOR MISCONDUCT OR CONTEMPT
The citation of “false” authorities shocked me (and many others) when the cases first started. Now it feels as if they are becoming a commonplace occurrence. They are, however, just as shocking. Here we have a case where the judge…
EXPERT WATCH 27 : WHAT DOES THE COURT DO WHEN AN EXPERT’S EXAMINATION HAS BEEN COVERTLY RECORDED? “I HOPE HE WILL NEVER DO IT AGAIN…”
Covert recordings, of one type or another, are featuring heavily on this blog today. Here we consider a case where a claimant secretly recorded her examination by an expert instructed by the defendant. The claimant then applied to admit the…
COST BITES 312: A CHANCE TO SEE COSTS BUDGETING IN ACTION: A CASE WHERE FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY IS ALLEGED AND THE CLAIMANT IS A PROTECTED PARTY
It is always interesting to read detailed decisions about costs budgeting. They are few and far between. We have a full judgment here where the Master deals with issues such as hourly rates, the impact of allegations of dishonesty and…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND ACCIDENTS AT WORK: WEBINAR 1ST DECEMBER 2025: CRITICISM USING HINDSIGHT IS EASY BUT DOES NOT NECESSARILY LEAD TO FINDINGS AGAINST A CLAIMANT
This webinar explores the complex area of contributory negligence in employer’s liability cases. It examines how courts approach allegations that an employee’s actions contributed to their own injury, drawing on key case law to illustrate judicial reasoning. Delegates will gain…
INTEREST ON PART 36 OFFERS: HOW SHOULD IT BE CALCULATED? GIVING THE CLAIMANT INTEREST ON COSTS BEFORE THEY WERE ACTUALLY INCURRED IS NOT AN ABSURDITY
This is an interesting Part 36 issue in a case where the claimant had beaten its own Part 36 offer. The court made an order for additional interest from the date of expiry of the offer. Does the defendant have…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE IN ROAD TRAFFIC CASES: DO ALL ROADS LEAD TO FROOM? WEBINAR 19th NOVEMBER 2025
Issues relating to contributory negligence often play a large part in road traffic cases. This webinar looks at the case law and guidance in relation to the key issues that often arise. Booking details are available here. (A failure to wear…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE LAW, PRACTICE AND SPECIAL CASES: WEBINAR 17th NOVEMBER 2025
You may be reading this for the second time – but it may be partly your own fault.… This webinar looks at the law relating to contributory negligence, the legislation and the key cases. Booking details are available here. …
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: A SERIES OF THREE WEBINARS THAT LOOK AT THE LAW AND PRACTICE IN DETAIL
Contributory negligence is one of the “Cinderella” subjects of legal practice. It is often alleged and often conceded. However the underlying principles that the courts apply are rarely looked at, let alone systematically. This is an important area because –…
NON-COMPLIANCE WITH A STATUTORY OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN PERMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUE LEADS TO AN ACTION BEING A NULLITY
We are looking here at at case where an action was struck out because of a failure to obtain permission of the court to issue proceedings. The judge rejected the claimant’s contention that the statute in question should be read…
OCCUPIER’S LIABILITY CASES IN THE COURTS: A PRACTICAL APPROACH: WEBINAR 29th OCTOBER 2025
This webinar looks at how the courts are dealing with occupiers liability cases and the duty of care. It takes a practical look at they way in which cases are decided and the factors which determine whether liability is established…
COST BITES 298: SHOULD THE DEFENDANT PAY ALL THE COSTS WHEN THE CLAIMANT DISCONTINUED AGAINST OTHER DEFENDANTS
We are looking here at an issue relating to a defendant’s liability to pay the costs of other defendants against whom no order for costs was made. Was the “paying” defendant also liable to pay the costs that the claimant…
SHOULD COSTS BE DISAPPLIED IN A “MIXED” CASE WHERE PART OF A CLAIM HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT? A DECISION ON APPEAL
What order for costs should the court make in a “mixed” claim when part of the claim is struck out but a personal injury claim continues. That was the question considered in the appeal we are looking at here. In…
EXPERT WATCH 21: THE EXPERT WHO FAILED TO CONSIDER NEW EVIDENCE IN SUFFICIENT DETAIL AND “WHO WAS NOT PARTICULARLY OPEN TO RECONSIDERING HIS OPINION”
Here we look at a judgment about medical evidence in a personal injury action. The issue was one of causation – whether an earlier injury to the claimant’s leg “caused” a later decision to have that leg amputated. The critique…
SOME MORE ABOUT SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE: THOSE CARRYING OUT THE FILMING MUST NOT ATTEMPT TO USURP THE ROLE OF THE TRIAL JUDGE
We are looking again at the decision yesterday in relation to the conduct of surveillance evidence. Just to highlight two issues: (1) a camera operator should not try to usurp the functions of the judge. The practice of providing a…
SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE UNDER SCRUTINY, ADMISSIBILITY AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED: “THE PROVIDING OF PATENTLY UNTRUE WITNESS STATEMENTS TO THE COURT, ENDORSED WITH STATEMENTS OF TRUTH, IS A MATTER OF SERIOUS CONCERN TO THE COURT”
This is the most serious criticism of surveillance operatives as I have seen. The judge found that the operatives, filming on behalf of a defendant for the purpose of litigation, had been “fundamental and repeated” errors. The operatives then put…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN PEOPLE ARE GIVING EVIDENCE OF SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED 12 1/2 YEARS PREVIOUSLY (AND SOME OF THEM WERE CHILDREN)
Here we are looking at judicial fact finding when a judge was considering witness evidence as to an accident that had happened some 12 1/2 years before the date of the trial. Like many such accidents it happened in a…
THERE IS NO END TO THE MATERIAL THAT LITIGANTS CAN PUT ON SOCIAL MEDIA: FIND SOMEONE TO LIE FOR ME… ALL RECORDED ON FACEBOOK
We are taking a closer look at the judgment on fundamental dishonesty. I want to hone in on the issue of the evidence provided by social media, in this case Facebook. This case is an almost textbook example of a…
THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: EX-SOLDIER FAILS IN HER CASE AND NOW NO LONGER HAS THE PROTECTION OF QOCS
Here we look at a case where the claimant was found to be fundamentally dishonest. The judge commented on the irony of the fact that she had a substantial claim for damages, even without that dishonesty. Nevertheless the evidence of…
WILL AN INSURER PAY FOR THIS? THE THIRD PARTY RIGHTS AGAINST INSURERS ACT 2010, THE ROAD TRAFFIC ACT, THE MIB AND OTHER ROUTES TO OBTAINING PAYMENT: WEBINAR 16th SEPTEMBER 2025
The new series on enforcement on this site shows the major problems a successful litigant can have even after they have obtained a judgment. This webinar looks at the routes by which a claimant can attempt to investigate or ensure…
LIABILITY FOR ACCIDENTS INVOLVING OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES: WEBINAR 3rd SEPTEMBER 2025
As recent events have shown the consequences of inadequate training, supervision and knowledge of those responsible for running outdoor activities can lead to major injuries and fatalities. The webinar looks at the case law, statutes and general guidance in relation…
ANONYMITY AND REPORTING RESTRICTIONS IN CIVIL CASES (2): THE PROCESS THAT JUDGE’S SHOULD FOLLOW WHEN CONSIDERING THESE ISSUES
The previous post looked at the Court of Appeal decision yesterday in relation to applications for anonymity in civil cases. Here we take a close look at the factors that the courts have to consider when an application for anonymity…
COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY ON ANONYMITY AND REPORTING RESTRICTION ORDERS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES BROUGHT BY CHILDREN AND PROTECTED PARTIES
This is the first of several posts that will look at the Court of Appeal judgment today in relation to the principles concerning applications for anonymity and reporting restrictions on children and protected parties involved in litigation. Here was have…
EXPERT WATCH 11: EXPERT ASSERTS THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS MALINGERING BUT WOULDN’T TELL THE COURT ABOUT THE DETAILS OF THE TESTS THAT LED TO THAT CONCLUSION
We have seen some unusual conduct of experts on this site. However the case we look at today has elements that we have not looked at before. An expert carried out tests on the claimant and, as a result of…
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2025 (1): LIMITATION IN PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS – HOW DOES ANYONE MISS A THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?
In an ideal world all personal injury limitation periods would be three years, and all other action six. However we do not live in an ideal world. The first, and most obvious, place to look at avoiding negligence claims is…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 10: WAS THIS CLAIM STATUTE BARRED?IF SO SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION UNDER SECTION 33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980?
Here we look at a decision in relation to limitation. The trial judge had to determine whether the claimant’s action was statute barred. If it was she then had to consider whether it was appropriate to exercise the court’s discretion…
PAYING BACK DAMAGES AND COSTS AFTER A SUCCESSFUL APPEAL: WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE RATE OF INTEREST?
It is extremely painful, when a party has won at trial, to have to pay damages back after a successful appeal. The lawyers find it equally painful to have to repay costs. To rub salt into the wounds the successful…
EXPERT WATCH 10: CLAIMANT UNSUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL IN ATTEMPTING TO OVERTURN THE TRIAL JUDGE’S PREFERENCE FOR THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS: “THE IRREDUCIBLE FACT IS IS THAT THE JUDGE ACCEPTED THE EXPERT EVIDENCE OF THE RESPONDENT’S KEY WITNESS AND PREFERRED TO OVER THE EVIDENCE OF THE APPELLANT’S KEY EXPERT WITNESS”
There are relatively few cases where a party appeals on the basis that trial judge was wrong to accept the evidence of one party’s expert witness in preference to the other. There are even fewer cases where such an appeal…
COST BITES 266: WHAT DOES THE COURT DO IF THE COSTS ARE DISPROPORTIONAL AFTER A LINE BY LINE ASSESSMENT? A WORKING EXAMPLE
Here we look at a judgment relation to proportionality and the assessment of costs. The claimant’s costs had been substantially reduced after a three day assessment but the judge found that the total sum was still disproportional. The judge could…
EXPERT WATCH 8: “SCIENCE DOES NOT CHANGE” : EVIDENCE THAT WAS “UNIMPRESSIVE IN PARTS AND OF LITTLE ASSISTANCE TO THE COURT”
To end the week I am looking at another decision about expert witnesses (it has been a theme this week). This time we are looking at accident reconstruction experts. One expert was found wanting, the judge favoured the other. The…
COST BITES 263: QOCS AND CLAIMS AGAINST THE POLICE – A SIMILAR ISSUE TO YESTERDAY BUT WITH A TOTALLY DIFFERENT RESULT (NO ONE EVER SAID LITIGATION WAS EASY…)
Yesterday we looked at a case where, on appeal, the judge indicated that he would set aside a costs order made against the claimants who had brought an action against the police. The claimants had QOCS protection. Today we look…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 2: OVER TWO WEEKS IN COURT, A PANOPALY OF EXPERTS – BUT THE CASE CAME DOWN TO “WHO SAID WHAT TO WHO?”
The principles relating to clinical negligence cases are well known. The major problem is usually determining the facts. In cases that involve a disputed recollection of what was said and asked in medical consultations this gives rise to major issues. …
You must be logged in to post a comment.