PROVING THINGS 228: PLEADING AND PROVING MITIGATION OF LOSS: THE NEED FOR A DEFENDANT TO ESTABLISH A “CONCRETE CASE”
The judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Mathieu v Hinds & Anor [2022] EWHC 924 (QB) is interesting for a large number of reasons. Here we look at the judgment in relation to pleading and proving mitigation of loss. “A…
WHEN A WITNESS GIVES DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS IN DIFFERENT STATEMENTS IT RARELY HELPS THEIR CASE: JUDGE FINDS IT “UNIMPRESSIVE”
In Parry v Johnson & Anor (Rev1) [2022] EWHC 889 (QB) Mr Justice Ritchie considered the evidence of the defendant driver in a road traffic case. The defendant’s different accounts on different occasions did not help his cause. The judge…
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED IN GROUP LITIGATION ORDER
In Baker & Ors v Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft & Ors (VW NOx Emissions Group Litigation) [2022] EWHC 810 (QB) Senior Master Fontaine refused the applicants’ application for relief from sanctions in relation to their inclusion in a register for a Group…
COURT ALLOWS CLAIMANT’S APPEAL AGAINST FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: THE DEFENDANT SHOULD HAVE GIVEN NOTICE OF THE ISSUES AND MADE ITS CASE CLEAR
In Jenkinson v Robertson [2022] EWHC 756 (Admin) Mr Justice Choudhury set aside a trial judge’s finding of fundamental dishonesty on the part of a claimant. This is a judgment that highlights the need for defendants to give clear notice…
TEXTING WHILE DRIVING AND CIVIL LIABILITY: JUDGES KNOW, YOU KNOW: “A CONCLUSION I REACH WITHOUT ENTHUSIASM BUT THE EVIDENCE IS COMPELLING”
In HRA v KGC [2022] EWHC 650 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered the question of liability. It is an example of a phone record playing a part in the decision that the defendant was negligent. The judge found that the…
CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS OF THE SELF-EMPLOYED AND THOSE INVOLVED IN ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORT: WEBINAR 14th MARCH 2022
There are 5 million self-employed people in the United Kingdom making up 15.5% of the workforce. A self-employed person (including directors of small companies) face particular difficulties when seeking to recover loss of earnings after being injured. Similarly those who…
THE COURTS WILL RARELY DETERMINE ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AS A PRELIMINARY ISSUE
In Stannard -v- Euro Garages Ltd [2022] EW Misc 3 (CC) HHJ Walden-Smith dismissed the defendant’s application that the issue of alleged fundamental dishonesty be heard as a preliminary issue and the action struck out. The judge held it was…
CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LEARNING FROM RECENT CASES: WEBINAR 7th MARCH 2022
The “Proving Things” series on this blog often looks at cases relating to loss of income. Recent cases on this topic are explored in a webinar on the 7th March 2022: Claims for Loss of Earnings: Learning from Recent Cases,…
Children and liability: Law, practice and procedure: WEBINAR 22nd FEBRUARY 2022
This webinar looks at the law and practice relating to children as claimants and defendants. It also looks at those cases where allegations are made against those who had care of the children and vicarious liability for the acts of…
THE USE OF A SECOND REPORT IN THE LOW VALUE ROAD TRAFFIC PROTOCOL: FAILURE TO DISCLOSE FIRST REPORT TO THE DEFENDANT DID NOT LEAD TO MEDICAL EVIDENCE BEING EXCLUDED
I am grateful to barrister Kriti Upadhyay for sending me copies of the judgment of Mrs Justice Foster in Greyson -v- Fuller [2022] EWHC 211 (QB), a copy of which is available here Greyson v Fuller – HC Judgment 3-2-22…
CHANGES TO THE HIGHWAY CODE: WHERE TO FIND THEM AND WHY THEY ARE IMPORTANT TO LAWYERS (APART FROM THE FACT THAT LAWYERS, WALK, DRIVE AND RIDE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE?)
The Highway Code is changing on the 29th January 2022. This has some relevance to lawyers. Here we look at the importance of the Highway Code, the significant changes, with links as to where to find the new rules and…
PROVING THINGS 223: PROVING A SUBSTANTIAL LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIM (£1,206,053 TO BE EXACT)
In Palmer v Mantas & Anor [2022] EWHC 90 (QB) Anthony Metzer QC (sitting as Deputy High Court Judge) awarded a claimant £1,206,053) in loss of earnings. The judge found that the approach in Smith -v- Manchester was not an…
A CLAIMANT IS NOT FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST WHEN THEY DON’T PROVIDE INFORMATION THAT IS NOT ASKED FOR: JUDGMENT FOR £1,679,406 IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE
In Palmer v Mantas & Anor [2022] EWHC 90 (QB) Anthony Metzer QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) rejected an argument that a claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. Judgment was entered for £1,679.406 instead of a finding of…
LIMITATION, SEXUAL ABUSE AND THE SECTION 33 DISCRETION: A FAIR TRIAL WAS NOT POSSIBLE AND CLAIMANTS’ ACTION DISMISSED
The previous post looked at the decision in TVZ & Ors v Manchester City Football Club [2022] EWHC 7 (QB) in relation to the issue of vicarious liability. However it is important to note that the claimants did not succeed in…
VICARIOUS LIABILITY AND SEXUAL ABUSE: THIS IS NOT A TEST OF INTUTION, BUT ONE THAT IS TIGHTLY CONTROLLED
The judgment of Mr Justice Johnson in TVZ & Ors v Manchester City Football Club [2022] EWHC 7 (QB) makes for difficult reading. The judge pays tribute to the remarkable men who brought the action, all of whom had been…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATIONS: 10 MATTERS THAT WILL INCREASE THE PROSPECTS OF SUCCESS
Here I want to look at some practical matters which can help a party seeking relief from sanctions. This is guidance on the most prudent steps to take but it should be made clear that there are no easy options….
WHEN A CLAIMANT RELIES ON EXPERT EVIDENCE TO PROVE LIABILITY: THE (NOT SO) SLIPPERY SLOPE TO FAILURE
I am grateful to barrister Frederick Simpson for sending me his note of a decision where the claimant relied heavily on expert evidence in order to establish their claim. There were weaknesses in the report which contributed to the claimant’s…
INSOLVENCY FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS: WEBINAR 16th DECEMBER 2021
On the 16th December 2021 I am presenting a webinar “Insolvency for Personal Injury Lawyers”. In addition to the issues relating to personal insolvency the webinar will look at the latest cases in relation to third party rights against insurers…
PROVING THINGS 220: ANOTHER CASE WHERE FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY NOT ESTABLISHED
In Long v Elegant Resorts Ltd [2021] EWHC 1330 (QB) HHJ Pearce, sitting as a judge of the High Court, did not accept the defendant’s contention that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. The defendant was relying on a factor…
PROVING THINGS 219: FAILING TO PROVE ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY
In Mathewson v Crump & Anor [2020] EWHC 3167 (QB) Dan Squires QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) did not accept the defendants’ submissions that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest in pursuing a personal injury claim. THE…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE RECENT CASES AND THEIR PRACTICAL RELEVANCE: WEBINAR 9th DECEMBER 2021
On the 9th December 2021 I am giving a webinar on contributory negligence. This looks at recent cases where contributory negligence has been considered in the courts and the practical lessons that litigators can learn from this. Booking details available…
MODERN SLAVERY AND THE LIABILITY OF AN INSURER: COURT REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT INSURERS ARE LIABLE TO INDEMNIFY “EMPLOYERS” IN MODERN SLAVERY CASE
In the decision today in Komives & Anor v Hick Lane Bedding Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 3139 (QB) Mrs Justice May refused the claimants’ appeal on the issue of whether an insurer was entitled to avoid an employer’s liability…
THE NEED FOR A CLAIMANT TO PROVE INJURY: WITHOUT EVIDENCE THE ACTION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT
The earlier post on proving causation highlights the matters that claimants need to prove when bringing a claim for damages. One essential element is that a claimant needs to prove damages. One case that shows a clear illustration of this…
PROVING THINGS 218: THE NEED TO PROVE CAUSATION IN ADDITION TO BREACH OF DUTY
The Court of Appeal judgment in Cunningham v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council [2021] EWCA Civ 1719 highlights the need to prove issues of causation in addition to breach of duty. THE CASE The claimant is a teacher who was attacked…
PROVING DAMAGES: WEBINAR 25th NOVEMBER 2021
At the moment there are 217 individual posts in the “Proving Things” series on this blog. Many, if not most, of the posts relate to a failure by a party to prove a crucial piece of their case at trial….
THE INTOXICATED PASSENGER AND ESTABLISHING CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Campbell v Advantage Insurance Company Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1698 the Court of Appeal upheld a finding that a claimant could be contributory negligent even when drunk. However it is important that the facts of this case are looked…
WHEN A WITNESS CHANGES A KEY PART OF THEIR EVIDENCE WHILST GIVING EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: THIS DOES NOT END WELL
In Murphy v Milton Keynes Parks Trust Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 2917 (QB) HHJ Crane considered that (relatively familiar) scenario of a party giving new evidence at the date of the trial. The claimant, it must be emphasised, was…
IS A CLUB YARD A “PUBLIC PLACE”? REVERSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO INSURER DEFENDANTS
In Brown v Fisk & Ors [2021] EWHC 2769 (QB) Master Dagnall granted reverse summary jugment to an insurer defendant. This involved consideration of whether a yard was a “public place” under s.151 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. THE…
SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: WEBINAR 4th NOVEMBER 2021
On the 4th November I am giving a webinar on surveillance evidence. Booking details are available here. This webinar deals with practice and procedure in relation to the production of surveillance evidence in personal injury cases and looks at: The…
PROVING THINGS 217: WHEN AN ACCIDENT IS UNEXPLAINED: RES IPSA LOQUITUR CANNOT ASSIST
The problems of establishing liability when its cause is not certain are set out in the judgment of Mr Justice Robin Knowles in Savigar v Ainscough Crane Hire Ltd [2021] EWHC 2707 (QB). THE CASE The claimant suffered serious…
THE DUTY OF CARE OWED TO A TRESPASSER: A TRAGIC CASE CONSIDERED BY THE COURTS
In Ovu v London Underground Ltd (duty of care) [2021] EWHC 2733 (QB) Master McCloud considered the duty of care owed to a trespasser. Her judgment starts with a reminder that this is a case about the death of a…
INTERIM PAYMENTS: THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS CONSIDERED BY THE COURTS
Later today I am presenting a webinar on interim payments. It is difficult, if not impossible, to discuss all possible permutations in relation to interim payments during a one hour slot and this post supplements the webinar. Here we look…
INTERIM PAYMENTS WHEN THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DEFENDANTS: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
I am grateful to barrister Michael Lemmy for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgment today in Buttar Construction Ltd -v- Arshdeep [2021] EWCA Civ 1408. The Court considered arguments about whether an interim payment should have…
EXAGGERATION OF INJURIES IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) Mr Justice Jacobs rejected an appeal from a defendant that argued the trial judge should have found a claimant to be fundamentally dishonest. “The Defendant’s argument, based on the word…
SUING AN IMPECUNIOUS DEFENDANT IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S INSURANCE POLICY…
Every couple of years I repost the second post ever on this blog -“suing the man of straw”. The points made remain a surprise to many. An injured claimant may be able to recover unpaid damages from their own insurer….
CHILD PEDESTRIAN WAS NOT CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENT: HIGH COURT DECISION
In A (a minor) by her litigation friend FA -v- Akram [2021] EWHC 2467 (QB), 2021 WL 04111024 HHJ Bird (sitting as a High Court judge) rejected an argument that a nine year old child had been contributory negligent. It…
SECTION 33 CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: TRIAL JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO EXERCISE THEIR DISCRETION
In Blackpool Football Club Ltd v DSN [2021] EWCA Civ 1352 the Court of Appeal considered, and upheld, a decision on Section 33 where the discretion was exercised in favour of the claimant. This was in the context, however, of…
PERSONAL INJURY ACTION BROUGHT AFTER EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL SETTLEMENT NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DEFENDANT HAS GOT WHAT IT SIGNED UP TO…
In Farnham-Oliver v RM Educational Resources Ltd [2021] EWHC 2418 (QB) Master Dagnall rejected an argument that personal injury proceedings, brought after employment proceedings had been settled, were an abuse of process. The settlement agreement had specifically stated that it…
CLAIMANT WHO FAILED TO USE THE PORTAL WAS UNREASONABLE AND HAS TO FACE THE MUSIC: FIXED COSTS APPLY
I am grateful to Gemma Blackburn from DWF Law for bringing my attention to the judgment of Costs Judge Haworth in Harford v Music Store Professional UK/DV247 Ltd [2021] EWHC B17 (Costs). “I am satisfied that in this case…
JUDGE ENTITLED TO FIND A CLAIMANT WAS NOT DISHONEST: IT MAY BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO DIRECT ATTENTION TO SOLICITOR RATHER THAN THE “HAPLESS CLIENT”
In Michael v I E & D Hurford Ltd (t/a Rainbow) [2021] EWHC 2318 (QB) Mrs Justice Stacey refused the defendant’s appeal in a case where the trial judge had found the claimant not to be fundamentally dishonest. The claimant…
DEFENDANT NOT LIABLE TO PAY THE COSTS OF DISPUTES OVER WHO SHOULD BE CLAIMANT’S LITIGATION FRIEND
In HR v Aneurin Bevan University Local Health Board [2021] EWHC 2195 (Admin) Mrs Justice Foster rejected an argument that the defendant should be liable to pay the costs incurred when there was a dispute in relation to the identity…
DEALING WITH THE COUNTER-SCHEDULE AND COUNTER-ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th JULY 2021
This webinar looks at the legal principles and arguments that can be used to reduce claims for personal injury damages. It is being held on the 16th July 2021 (and available as an on-demand recording to the 16th January 2022). …
INTERIM PAYMENTS, ACCOMMODATION AND THE “EELES” CRITERIA: HIGH COURT ORDERS AND INTERIM PAYMENT OF £500,000
In AL v Collingwood Insurance & Ors [2021] EWHC 1761 (QB) Mr Justice Robin Knowles allowed a claimant’s application for a further interim payment of £500,000 to secure accommodation for a brain injured child. The case contains an important discussion…
WEBINAR ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: ACCOMMODATION AND APPLIANCE CLAIMS: 30th JUNE 2021
On the 30th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on accommodation and appliance claims. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR Claims for accommodation and appliances are a major part of many serious claims. Here we look at the…
CARE CLAIMS IN PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 25th JUNE 2021
On the 25th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on Care Claims in personal injury actions. Booking details are available here. This webinar looks at claims for care, the law underpinning care and assistance claims, looking at practical…
DEDUCTION OF LEGAL FEES FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES: SOLICITORS SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL
The decision of Mr Justice Lavender in SGI Legal LLP v Karatysz [2021] EWHC 1608 (QB) is part of the long, and continuing, battle relating to the deduction of legal fees by solicitors from claimant’s damages. In this case the…
LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIM: WEBINAR 18th JUNE 2021
On the 18th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on loss of earnings claims. The material includes a client questionnaire in relation to loss of earnings and income. Booking details are available here. TOPICS COVERED BY THE…
AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: NO GREATER AMOUNT IF YOU ARE RICH: A BLAST FROM THE PAST (64 YEARS TO BE PRECISE)
Often this blog covers judgments on the day they were made. Today, however, we are going back 64 years to 1957 looking at the case of Dunhill -v- Lumby reported on the 1st February 1957 in the Times. WHY THIS…
MORE ON MULTIPLE INJURIES, THE TARIFF AND TEST CASES
Official Injuries Claims have issued a release explaining the approach to test cases and multiple injuries. This explains the collaborative approach being adopted to find test cases in claims where the injuries fall inside and outside the tariff scheme. “neither…
MULTIPLE INJURIES AND THE CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2018: CROSS-SECTOR WORKING GROUP WORKING ON IT
An earlier post dealt with the issues relating to multiple injuries in personal injury cases where a claimant suffered multiple injuries and some of those injuries are subject to the statutory tariff scheme whilst others are not. This is clearly…
You must be logged in to post a comment.