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…
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…
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…
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…
WHEN WITNESSES TOTALLY CHANGE THEIR EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: A CASE IN POINT
In Advantage Insurance Company Ltd v Harris [2024] EWHC 626 (KB) HHJ Russen KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that a claimant in a personal injury action had been in contempt of court for making false statements. It…
COST BITES 139: A CLAIMANT WAS NOT AWARDED COSTS AGAINST HIS OWN SOLICITORS: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU BURY YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND
The judgment of Deputy Master Grimshaw in Al Tarboush v Cassam [2024] EWHC 639 (KB) shows two things: (i) the limitations of the wasted costs procedure; (ii) the major procedural problems that can arise in the course of a case…
SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT TODAY: WHIPLASH TARIFF INJURIES AND COMMON LAW DAMAGES: HOW SHOULD THE COURT DEAL WITH “MIXED” CLAIMS
In Hassam & Anor v Rabot & Anor [2024] UKSC 11 the Supreme Court rejected the defendant’s appeal against the way in which damages are assessed. It upheld the the majority view of the Court of Appeal that the Civil…
ISSUES OF CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: ONE BAD DECISION, NOT THREE POOR ONES
There is an interesting discussion on the principles of contributory negligence in the judgment of HHJ Keyser KC in Owens v Lewis [2024] EWHC 609 (KB). “(1) Where any person suffers damage as the result partly of his own…
COST BITES 135: COSTS OF SOLICITOR ATTENDING REHABILITATION CASE MANAGEMENTS – MAY BE RECOVERABLE, BUT IT DEPENDS…
In Hadley -v- Przybylo [2024] EWCA Civ 250 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of whether a solicitor in a personal injury case could recover the cost of attending rehabilitation case meetings. It was decided that the costs are potentially recoverable….
DAMAGES FOR CARE: RECENT CASES AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE FOR PRACTITIONERS: WEBINAR 8th FEBRUARY 2024
This webinar look at claims for care, the law underpinning care and assistance claims, looking at practical ways of preparing the case and presenting the schedule and cover. The webinar covers, in particular, the cases and observations made in recent…
DAMAGES FOR THE SELF EMPLOYED AND THOSE INVOLVED IN ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORT: WEBINAR 25th JANUARY 2024
On the 24th January there is a webinar looking at claims for damages for self-employed people. It also looks at the issues relating to losses, particularly loss of earnings, caused by those involved in sports and entertainment (it also looks…
QOCS: CLAIMS FOR £1 IN DAMAGES AND NOMINAL DAMAGES STILL HAVE QOCS PROTECTION
In Clark & Ors v Adams & Anor [2024] EWHC 62 (KB) Mr Justice Soole determined that claims for £1 in damages and for “vindicatory purposes only” still have the protection of QOCS. The size of the claim and the…
DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: WEBINAR 18th JANUARY 2024
An injured claimant is often most concerned about their ability to earn their living. This webinar looks at the essential elements of a claim for loss of earnings. It looks at recent cases to illustrate in a practical way how…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: WEBINAR 11th JANUARY: PART OF THE DAMAGES SERIES 2024
On the 11th January 2024 I am presenting a webinar on Damages for pain and suffering. This is a part of a series of webinars looking at the basic elements of major heads of damages for personal injury, with a…
SERIES OF WEBINARS ON DAMAGES: AVAILABLE AS A “BUNDLE” – OR ONE AT A TIME…
Next year I am presenting a series of eight webinars on personal injury damages. APIL is offering these as one off webinars, or the whole series can be subscribed to as a “bundle”. Booking details are available here. THE…
COURT REFUSES TO GRANT AN ORDER FOR A GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: INCORRECT PROCEDURE; COSTS AND “WHACK -A-MOLE” CONSIDERED
Several kind people have sent me a copy of the decision in Abbott & Ors v Ministry of Defence [2023] EWHC 2839 (KB). This is an unusual case because, despite the claimant and defendant being in agreement, the court did…
COST BITES 120: QOCS AND HIRE CHARGES: DECISION THAT CLAIMANT SHOULD PAY COSTS OUTSIDE QOCS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL
In Amjad v UK Insurance Ltd [2023] EWHC 2832 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie overturned a decision that the QOCS cap should be lifted in relation to a claimant who had failed to beat the defendant’s Part 36 offer and who…
COST BITES 119: COSTS BUDGETING: DEFENDANT ALLOWED TO VARY ITS BUDGET TO INCLUDE COSTS ALREADY INCURRED OBTAINING SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE
There is a report of an interesting decision of Master McCloud in Yelland -v- Space Engineering Services Ltd [2023] EWHC 2823 (KB). The report is from Sean Linley of Carter Burnett and can be read here. There is a link to…
COST BITES 114: LOOKING AT DETAILED ASSESSMENTS (3): SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: THEY HAVE NOT BEEN DRAFTED SYSTEMATICALLY, OR WITH PROPER CARE AND ATTENTION
We are continuing with the series where we look closely at what can happen at a detailed assessment and return to the judgment of Cost Judge James in HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO). The judge…
WEBINARS ON DAMAGES IN 2024: SOMETHING TO WARM UP THE WINTER DAYS EARLY IN THE NEW YEAR…
Early next year I am presenting a series of eight webinars on personal injury damages. The series looks at the major heads of damages for personal injury and clinical negligence cases, with a particular emphasis on those claims in the…
WEBINAR ON DRAFTING SCHEDULES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: 9th NOVEMBER 2023
I am presenting a webinar on drafting Schedules on the 9th November 2023. Booking details are available here. “In the event, the Original Schedules of Loss were shown to be quite unreliable and, in many respects, bore little or no relation…
INSOLVENCY FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS: WEBINAR 15th SEPTEMBER 2023
Issues relating to individual insolvency, a claimant’s bankruptcy or the defendant’s financial position can loom large in some cases. From a claimant’s solicitor finding out, half way through a case, that their client is bankrupt, to the issues of proceeding…
FATAL ACCIDENTS AND LIMITATION: THERE IS NO BAR TO SECTION 33 BEING USED IF THE LIMITATION PERIOD EXPIRED PRIOR TO DECEASED PERSON’S DEATH
In Shaw v Maguire (Re Preliminary Issues) [2023] EWHC 2155 (KB) Master Cook considered an issue relating to limitation, Section 33 and fatal accident claims. Can a claimant rely on Section 33 in circumstances where the limitation period had expired…
DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: “THE SCHEDULE WAS A FICTION … THE POINT WAS RECOGNISED ON BEHALF OF BOTH CLAIMANTS”: SELECTED QUOTES (AND A WEBINAR)
The the judgment of Costs Judge James in HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO) is one of a long series of cases where judges have been critical of the way in which schedules of damages have been…
TWELVE KEY POINTS FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS ABOUT BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY (AND A PLUG FOR A WEBINAR)
I still see, on a fairly regular basis, problems caused in personal injury cases where a claimant is bankrupt and has failed to tell their lawyers. Equally often there are cases where it is clear that a claimant is, or…
TRIAL JUDGE’S FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY OVERTURNED: BECAUSE THE DISHONESTY WAS NOT “FUNDAMENTAL”
In Denzil v Mohammed & Anor [2023] EWHC 2077 (KB) Mr Justice Freedman overturned a finding by a trial judge that a claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. The finding that a minor head injury which was not part of the…
WITNESS STATEMENTS, PART 18 QUESTIONS AND CASE MANAGEMENT: THE MASTER WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO DISCLOSE HIS WITNESS EVIDENCE FIRST
It has taken to the third time of writing about the decision in Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB) to get to the detail of what the appeal was actually about. This part of the judgment is important…
EXPERTS: WHY IT IS UNWISE FOR A CLAIMANT TO BE AT A JOINT MEETING ON SITE: WHO SAYS YOU ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO CALL EXPERT EVIDENCE ANYWAY? HIGH COURT DECISION
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB). This time looking at the observations made in relation to experts. Firstly it was unwise for a claimant to be present,…
DEFENDANT NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO ENFORCE COSTS IN A CASE WHERE THERE WAS A “MIXED CLAIM”
I am grateful to Kevin Donoghue from Donoghue solicitors for bringing my attention to the judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Afriyie v Commissioner of Police for the City of London (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 1974 (KB). It is a…
EXPERTS AND THE COURTS: THE DUTY TO INFORM EXPERTS OF CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES: THE EXPERT’S DUTY TO INFORM THE COURT AND PARTIES OF A CHANGE OF VIEWS
We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB) (A copy of the judgment, on Old Square Chambers website, is available here.) Again we are looking at the judge’s comments…
EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS SHOULD BE SCRUTINISED AND NOT SIMPLY TRANSPOSED INTO SCHEDULES: “A CARE EXPERT SHOULD BE ABLE TO FULLY JUSTIFY ANY ASPECT OF CARE… WHICH THE COURT IS BEING ADVISED SHOULD BE PROVIDED”
In Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter sent out another warning about the inadequate state of expert reports. Here we look at the judgment in relation to the care experts. (A copy of…
THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES: WEBINAR 20th SEPTEMBER 2023
On the 20th September 2023 I am presenting a webinar looking at issues relating to the deduction of costs from the client’s damages in a personal injury claim.This webinar looks at the regulations and case law relating to the deduction…
ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FAILED: MANY OF THE ASSERTIONS DID NOT GO “TO THE HEART OF THE CLAIM”
In Afriyie v Commissioner of Police for the City of London [2023] EWHC 1632 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill rejected the defendant’s twelve allegations of fundamental dishonesty made against a claimant. Some of the assertions were rejected because they did not…
WHAT HAPPENS TO INTEREST WHEN A DEFENDANT ACCEPTS A CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER LATE? HIGH COURT DECISION
In MGS v University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 1547 (KB) Dexter Dias (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) rejected an argument that interest should run at 8% following the defendant’s late acceptance of the claimant’s…
PROVING THINGS 229: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE CERTAIN HEADS OF DAMAGES: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Lal v Reeder [2023] EWHC 1437 (KB) is a classic example of a failure to prove things. The trial judge found that the claimant had failed to establish certain heads of damage. That…
INFLATION TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN ASSESSING DAMAGES USING THE JUDICIAL COLLEGE GUIDELINES
In Blair v Jaber [2023] EW Misc 3 (CC) Recorder Jack considered the issue of whether the court should take into account inflation when looking at the Judicial College Guidelines. The Recorder held that it should. …
COST BITES 90: CLAIMANTS LIABLE TO PAY 5% OF DEFENDANT’S COSTS: HUMAN RIGHTS, PERSONAL INJURIES AND “MIXED CLAIMS”
In ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Ors, Re Costs [2023] EWHC 1337 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill considered the liability of the claimants to pay costs in a “mixed claim” which was, primarily, a personal injury claim. She…
PROVING THINGS 226: PROVING CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE (AND A WEBINAR ON THAT VERY SUBJECT…)
There is often very little attention paid to judgments in relation to contributory negligence. Commentators tend to concentrate, on the whole, on primary liability. If considered at all contributory negligence is often an after thought – a “finding on the…
PROVING THINGS 255: HEARSAY NOTICE FROM AN ANONYMOUS CALLER HELPED DETERMINE KEY FINDINGS IN A CIVIL CASE: JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF THE CLAIMANT
The judgment of Her Honour Judge Howells (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in Brown & Anor v Sestras & Ors [2023] EWHC 1220 (KB) is an interesting example of the use of hearsay, indeed anonymous evidence. An unknown…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: LEARNING FROM RECENT CASES: WEBINAR 5th JUNE 2023
Contributory negligence is one of those issues that play a daily part of the life of the personal injury practitioner. The basic principles underlying findings of contributory negligence are rarely explored, however these can have profound practical implications for the…
INTEREST ON DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURY CANNOT BE USED AS A MEANS OF PENALISING A DEFENDANT FOR POOR BEHAVIOUR: PART 36 ISSUES ALSO CONSIDERED
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Smout v Wulfrun Hotels Ltd [2023] EWHC 1128 (KB) considers the question of the use of interest as a penalty for the poor conduct of a defendant. The judge held that interest should…
PART 36: NORMAL COSTS PROVISIONS DISAPPLIED WHEN A CHILD ACCEPTED A PART 36 OFFER LATE:
Yesterday I gave a webinar on recent developments in Part 36*. Almost inevitably a new case was reported as soon as the webinar finished. Further that case addresses, directly, some of the interesting questions that arose in the webinar. In…
CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO CONTINUE WITH THIRD SET OF PROCEEDINGS REFUSED: CPR 38.7 CONSIDERED IN DETAIL
In Danielewicz v Cannon & Anor [2023] EWHC 948 (KB) Master Thornett refused the claimant’s application for an order under CPR 38.7. The claimant had issued proceedings twice before, but discontinued those actions. The judgment contains a detailed consideration of…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: SOCIAL MEDIA, SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE AND A LONG WALK
I am grateful to Legal Executive Vanessa Brooks for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Harrison in Thomas -v- Owen (21st March 2023, Cardiff County Court). It is another example of social media playing a part in…
ANOTHER CHANGE IN THE RULES ON APRIL 6th: PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS CAN SAY GOODBYE (IN SOME CASES) TO THE ADMIRALTY COURT
The focus on the new rules on QOCS coming into force on the 6th April may lead to losing sight of some other changes. In particular the new rules and amendments to the Practice Direction in relation to accidents at…
Damages for pain and suffering: The legal principles and their practical implications: Webinar 12th April 2023
On the 12th April 2023 I am presenting a webinar on “Damages for pain and suffering”. Looking, in a detailed way at the practical issues that a litigator has to consider when dealing with awards for pain and suffering. The…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FOUND: “GOOD DAYS AND BAD DAYS” DID NOT PERSUADE THE COURT
I am grateful to barrister Andrew Ward for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Eyre which was handed down earlier this afternoon. In Mantey -v- Ministry of Defenchttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/2023/761.htmle [2023] EWHC 761 (KB) a finding of fundamental…
MISTAKES AND THE ROAD TRAFFIC PROTOCOL: DOCTRINE OF MISTAKE APPLIED: A WORKING EXAMPLE
In Doyle -v- the NFU (St Helens County Court 24th February 2023) Deputy District Judge Murray held that the doctrine of mistake applied to offers made on the Pre-Action Protocol for road traffic accidents. I am grateful to solicitor Jamil…
CLAIMANT HAD NOT “WON” UNDER PART 36 WHEN SHE HAD NOT BEATEN THE DEFENDANT’S OFFER ON DAMAGES BUT MADE AN OFFER IN RELATION TO LIABILITY: “BAFFLING” ARGUMENTS FAIL TO PREVAIL
NB THE OBSERVATIONS ABOUT PART 36 WERE DOUBTED AND “OVERRULED” BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN Smithstone v Tranmoor Primary School [2026] EWCA Civ 13. SEE THE DISCUSSION IN THE POST ON THE CASE HERE I am grateful to barrister…
SPORTING INJURIES AND CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT CONCEDES THE CLAIMANT’S CASE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION
The judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Czernuszka v King [2023] EWHC 380 (KB) contains important observations in relation to the duty of care owed to those taking place in sporting activities. It also shows the important role of…
You must be logged in to post a comment.