FIRST ANNIVERSARY OF CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF (OR CONFESSIONS OF A RELUCTANT BLOGGER)
Today marks the first anniversary of the setting up of this blog, tomorrow marks the anniversary of the first post. It gives an opportunity to recap (and reminisce). CIVIL PROCEDURE IN JUNE 2013 When the blog started civil procedure was…
GIVING EVIDENCE CAN BE A GRIZZLY BUSINESS: HOW DO THE COURTS ASSESS WHOSE ACCOUNT IS CORRECT?
In Grizzly Business Ltd -v- Stena Drilling Ltd [2014] EWHC 1920 (Comm) a judge had to decide between two competing versions of what was said in a telephone call three years earlier in a case when $2.5 million was at…
LEEDS LAW SOCIETY MEET THE JUDGES EVENT: JACKSON ONE YEAR (AND A FEW MONTHS) ON
Yesterday evening Leeds Law Society held a “meet the judges” evening when practitioners met local judges and court staff to discuss issues arising out of the implementation of the Jackson reforms. Some of the issues were specific to Leeds but most…
WHO IS WATCHING YOUR BACK? A CHECKLIST ON "DEFENSIVE LITIGATION"
The previous post looked at the “fish file” checklist prepared by groups in a recent session I conducted in at one of Kerry Underwood’s courses. A second checklist was also prepared by the groups and this related to “defensive litigation”….
YOU CAN AGREE TO EXTEND TIME NOW: BUT SHOULD YOU AGREE TO EXTENSIONS?
Parties can agree to extend time from the 5th June. I have already written on the dangers of the system. However, if the dangers can be sidestepped, should a litigator agree to extend time. THE HEATED DEBATE: SHOULD PARTIES AGREE EXTENSIONS? This…
"ESSENTIAL CHECKLISTS": THE COMPLETE LIST
The “Essential Checklist” series developed out of a workshop series in a course I gave last month. Six groups produced six checklists. Here is a link to them all. SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS: (“SERVICE WITH A SMILE”) Essential points before the…
SURVIVING MITCHELL 19: PRACTICE "DEFENSIVE LITIGATION" OR DON'T PRACTICE AT ALL
This is the 19th (and penultimate) in this series on “surviving Mitchell”. What the Mitchell case makes clear is that there is now precious little room for error in civil procedure. We have to develop systems of “defensive litigation”. That…
SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS: THE "ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST"
In earlier posts I have described how groups of litigators got together earlier this week to draft essential “safety” checklists for key elements of civil procedure. Here we have the checklist for service of proceedings. THE TEAM This checklist was…
YOU CAN AGREE TO EXTEND TIME – BUT BE VERY CAREFUL: FIVE DANGER POINTS EXPLORED
There is some relief for litigators (and the courts to be honest) now that parties (from the 5th June) are allowed to extend time. However the new rules introduce some potential traps. It is wise to be aware of these…
SURVIVING MITCHELL 17: MAKE ANY APPLICATION BEFORE DEFAULT AND OBTAIN REALISTIC DIRECTIONS
It is no coincidence that Rule 17 is identical to Rule 3. In fact I could easily, and without apology, repeat this principle as rules 10 – 20. If you cannot comply with a court order, direction or rule then…
DILATORY CONDUCT BY DEFENDANT CAUSES IT TO BE REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERTS
There is an important decision of Master Cook in the case of Chambers -v-Buckingham Healthcare NHS Trust available at dropbox The case highlights the fact that defendants too can fall foul of the problems caused by Mitchell. I will prepare…
OFFERS TO SETTLE: COSTS, CONDUCT AND A WHOLE LOT MORE: REHILL –v- RIDER HOLDINGS CONSIDERED
The case of Rehill –v- Rider Holdings [2014] EWCA Civ 42 offers quite a few lessons for litigators and litigants. In relation to offers and filing schedules of costs and the risks of litigation for litigants and lawyers. REHILL –v- RIDER…
SURVIVING MITCHELL 6: "YOU GOTTA HAVE A PLAN": BE READY FOR TRIAL THE DAY YOU ISSUE
The unforgiving nature of the Mitchell decision means that litigators have to be certain that they will be able to comply with any directions that the court orders. In effect this means that a claimant has to be ready for…
LODGING TRIAL BUNDLES ON TIME: THE COURT WILL NOT GIVE A RECEIPT
I received an e-mail today from Kerry Kirkbride of Active Legal Ltd in Birmingham. It follows an earlier post in relation to the need to lodge the trial bundle at time. I have permission from Kerry to re-print it in…
WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES IF THE CLAIMANT HAS JUDGMENT OR THE DEFENCE HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT?
One important aspect of the new rules about relief from sanctions is that they apply to defendants as well. A defendant who is late in adducing evidence can be debarred from calling evidence as in the Durrant case. Here we…
MORE MITCHELL MAYHEM: USE OF SQUARE BRACKETS LEADS TO COSTS BUDGET BEING DISALLOWED
A report by Tom Gibson in PI Brief Update makes worrying reading. The headline reads ” Would a district judge strike out a costs budget because it contained the phrase “[Statement of truth]”, in square brackets, rather than the full…
INTERESTING FIRST INSTANCE DECISION ON STRIKING OUT SPECIAL DAMAGES BECAUSE OF DILATORY CONDUCT BY THE CLAIMANT
The 9sjs website has an interesting report of a decision in the Bow County Court where the judge struck out a claim for £220,000 on the grounds that the claimant had not complied with directions. See the report at http://www.9sjs.com/assets/Uploads/ozbay.pdf It…
TEN MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION THAT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATOR SHOULD KNOW.
There are a surprising number of “myths” that prevail in personal injury litigation. In particular in relation to limitation. Here, as part of the “avoiding negligence” series we look at 10 of these myths. Myth 1: In a breach of…
HOW RELEVANT ARE PART 36 OFFERS TO ISSUE BASED ORDERS? A SALUTARY WARNING ABOUT THE RISKS OF LITIGATION
The making of an “issue based” costs order is now a common aspect of litigation. However how relevant is a Part 36 offer when a court is considering making an “issue based” costs order? A recent case contains discussion of…
You must be logged in to post a comment.