THE THIRD PARTY (RIGHTS AGAINST INSURERS) ACT 2010 AND THE DATE OF “ACTIONABLE DAMAGE”: COURT REFUSES TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIMANT’S CASE
In the judgment today in Brooks v Zurich Insurance Public Ltd Co & Anor [2022] EWHC 1170 (QB) Master Davison refused an application to strike out an action against insurers under the provisions of the Third Party (Rights Against Insurers)…
WHY YOU SHOULDN’T BANK ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT: THE COURT SHOULD NOT CONDUCT A “MINI TRIAL” ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATIONS
In Philipp v Barclays Bank UK Plc [2022] EWCA Civ 318 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against an order giving the defendant summary judgment in favour of the defendant bank. The court emphasised that summary judgment applications should…
ACTION STRUCK OUT WHEN CLAIMANT GIVES WRONG ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM
I am grateful to solicitor Hamish Cameron Blackie for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Bloom in Conlon -v- Ringway Infrastructure Services Ltd (County Court at Luton, 2nd December 2021) where the judge struck out an action…
CASE STRUCK OUT DUE TO CLAIMANT’S INACTIVITY: YOU CAN’T “WAREHOUSE” A COURT ACTION
In Alfozan v Quastel Midgen LLP [2022] EWHC 66 (Comm) HHJ Pearce (sitting as a High Court judge) struck out an action on the grounds of the claimant’s delay. The case had been “warehoused” and the claimant had not adduced…
“NO SERIOUS PRIVATE PAYING LITIGANT” WOULD CONTEMPLATE SPENDING £50,000 IN COSTS FOR A £3,000 CLAIM: ACTION SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ISSUED IN THE HIGH COURT
In Johnson v Eastlight Community Homes Ltd [2021] EWHC 3069 (QB) Master Thornett accepted, in large part, a defendant’s application in a case where a claim for £3,000 had been issued in the High Court and the costs claimed by…
CHALLENGE TO JURISDICTION OF THE COURT WAS AN APPROPRIATE STEP IN AN ACTION BROUGHT BY A “REDUNDANT” SOLDIER
There is a procedural issue considered in the judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Malone v Ministry of Defence [2021] EWHC 2958 (QB). The judge held that it was appropriate for the Ministry of Defence, facing a claim in…
CONSTRUING PEREMPTORY ORDERS: THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE IS THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Poule Securities Ltd v Howe & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1373 the Court of Appeal considered the construction of an “unless” order. It was held that the date for compliance on the order had to be construed as the…
WHEN YOU HAVE TWO IDENTICAL ACTIONS ON THE GO AT ONCE: COURT CONSIDERS THIS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
In Dixon v Santander Asset Finance Plc & Anor [2021] EWHC 1044 (Ch) HHJ Saffman (sitting as a High Court Judge) granted the defendant summary judgment on the basis that the claim against it was clearly statute barred. The judge…
COSTS OUTSIDE THE COSTS BUDGET WHEN A PARTY IS LIMITED TO COURT FEES: STRIKING OUT, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, ADMINSTRATIVE ERRORS BY THE COURT, ABORTIVE COURT HEARINGS: ALL PROCEDURAL LIFE IS HERE…
The decision of Mr Justice Marcus Smith in Pasricha v Pasricha [2021] EWHC 1017 (Ch) contains a consideration of the circumstances in which a court can order costs to be paid to a party when their budget has been limited…
WHEN JUDGE READS A DRAFT STATEMENT AND A FINAL STATEMENT (& THERE ARE SOME IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES): LITIGANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EVIDENCE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN BEFORE THE COURT AT THE ORIGINAL HEARING
The judgment of Mr Justice Francis in Brack v Brack [2020] EWHC 2142 (Fam) is an example of a case where the judge has the opportunity to see a draft statement and a final statement. The judge struck out an…
UNLESS ORDER MADE WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAD NOT PAID AN INTERLOCUTORY ORDER FOR COSTS
In Junejo v New Vision TV Ltd [2021] EWHC 449 (QB) Deputy Master Hill QC made a peremptory order that the claimant pay an order for costs. However that payment was to be by instalments. There is a useful review…
AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT”: NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
The issue of non-payment, or under-payment, of court fees was considered by the Court of Appeal in the judgment today in Butters & Anor v Hayes [2021] EWCA Civ 252. THE CASE During the course of an action the court…
YOU CANNOT USE A REPLY TO PLEAD MATTERS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
About ten minutes ago I sent off the material for a webinar I am giving tomorrow on drafting statements of case. Inevitably, therefore, a new and relevant case arrived on BAILLI* [the material was subsequently amended to include this] . …
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES AND PAY CORRECT COURT FEE CAN (BUT DIDN’T) LEAD TO AN ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT
In Udeshi & Ors v Sieratzki [2021] EWHC 213 (Ch) Master Kaye considered an argument that a failure to pay the correct fee, and other breaches of the CPR, should lead to an action being struck out. Given that the…
STRIKING OUT A MULTI-PARTY CASE AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: WHEN CASE MANAGEMENT IS “AKIN TO TRYING TO BUILD A HOUSE OF CARDS IN A WIND TUNNEL”
Returning to the substantive issue in the judgment of Turner J in Município De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group Plc & Anor [2020] EWHC 2930 (TCC). The judge struck out the claims of 202,600 claimants on the grounds that…
CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF 25 YEARS AGO: A QUARTER OF A CENTURY OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
Nobody knew what a “blog” was 25 years ago. However at that time Civil Litigation Brief did exist, it was a monthly column in the Solicitors Journal. It is interesting to see how much (or how little) matters have moved…
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES STRUCK OUT: APPLICATION TO AMEND REFUSED: CLAIMANT FAILED TO USE THEIR LOAF AS CLAIM IS SLICED…
The judgment of Mrs Justice Jefford in The Leicester Bakery (Holdings) Ltd v Ridge And Partners LLP [2020] EWHC 2430 (TCC) shows the necessity of being able to particularise a claim for damages. What it demonstrates is that, in claims…
CASE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF THE ABSENCE OF A LETTER BEFORE ACTION AND INCORRECT USE OF THE PART 8 PROCEDURE
In Halal Meat Sellers Committee Ltd & Anor v HMC (UK) Ltd [2020] EWHC 2190 (Comm) the court struck out the claimants’ claim as an abuse of process. It is interesting to note that the court indicated that there were…
PROVING THINGS 178: PROVING PREJUDICE: THE NEED FOR SPECIFIC EVIDENCE
There is another aspect of the Court of Appeal decision in Cable v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 1015 that justifies closer examination. That is the court’s observations on the judge’s finding of prejudice. The Court of Appeal…
USING RTA PROTOCOL AND PART 8 PROCEDURE INAPPROPRIATELY DID NOT LEAD TO ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
The Court of Appeal today gave judgment in Cable v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 1015 and overturned the decision to strike out an action because it had been issued inappropriately using the portal and Part 8…