QOCS CONTINUE TO APPLY IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: DECISION TODAY: CLAIMANT STILL HAS THE SHIELD OF QOCS PROTECTION
I am grateful to barrister Sarah Robson for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgment today in Wickes -v- Blair (No 2) Costs [2020] EWCA Civ 17. The Court of Appeal held that QOCS protection continues to…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 71: TIME FOR SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: SERVE WITHIN THE FOUR MONTH PERIOD
In Maggistro-Contenta & Anor v O’Shea & Anor [2019] EWHC 3035 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh stated. “The requirement in CPR 7.4(2) that particulars of claim must be served no later than the latest time for service of the claim form has been…
SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND THE “TRAP FOR THE UNWARY CLAIMANT”: THE TRAP OPERATED AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED
The judgment of Chief Master Marsh today in Maggistro-Contenta & Anor v O’Shea & Anor [2019] EWHC 3035 (Ch) is a prime example of difficulties being caused because of a mistake in relation to the rules relating to service. It…
CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – OCTOBER 2019
Here we have links to blogs and articles about civil procedure and costs from October 2019. (If you have written a blog post or article that you think should have been included in this round up please contact me and…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 68: THE FORMAL REQUIREMENTS OF A WITNESS STATEMENT (AGAIN)
I am returning to the issue of the basic and mandatory requirements of a witness statement. Here we are looking at the very basic rules as to what should appear on the first page of a witness statement. WHY YOU SHOULD…
STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 3: SLEEP
I imagine that every single medical practitioner agrees on the importance of sleep in an individual’s health. It affects both physical and mental well being. Yet lawyers are ranked second amongst the most sleep deprived professions. Studies indicate that lawyers…
CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES: WHY JUDGES GO “BACK TO BASICS”: A REMINDER FOR LITIGATORS
This is the first of a series of posts designed (to be frank) to remind people that the next edition of “Damages for Personal Injury and Death” will be published later this year. One interesting aspect of writing a book,…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: FAILURE TO SERVE ANY DEFENDANTS WHEN APPLYING FOR AN INJUNCTION: THE GOOSE IS NOT PROPERLY COOKED…
In Canada Goose UK Retail Ltd v Persons Unknown & Anor [2019] EWHC 2459 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin refused the claimants’ application for an injunction on several grounds. Here we look at the issues relating to service of the claim…
THE IMPACT OF FAILURE TO MITIGATE DAMAGES ON A CLAIM FOR COSTS: CLAIMANT’S COSTS CONFINED TO SMALL CLAIMS TRACK
I am grateful to Simon Fisher, Costs Lawyer at DWF Costs Ltd, for sending me a copy of the decision of District Judge Matthews in Messenger -v- Zenith Insurance (3rd July 2019). A copy of the transcript is available here….
LAWYERS – GOING ON HOLIDAY AND AVOIDING EXTRA STRESS: ADVICE FROM TWITTER
Since we are in the middle of the holiday season I have noticed how some people are reporting that going on, and coming back, from holidays is a stressful experience. I asked the lawyers (and others) on Twitter to give…
A SOLICITOR WHO FILES AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE STAYS ON THE RECORD UNTIL A NOTICE OF CHANGE OR THEY MAKE AN APPLICATION TO BE REMOVED
In Ashley & Anor v Jimenez [2019] EWHC 1806 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh rejected an argument that service on a solicitor who given their address for service in the acknowledgement of service was not good service of an application. For…
RIGHTS OF AUDIENCE IN CHAMBERS: A RESPONSE: WHAT IS MEANT BY “IN CHAMBERS”?
Last month I reported on a decision in relation to rights of audience in “chambers”, in particular what was meant by chambers. That led to a lot of (sometimes heated) discussion on Twitter and a response from “Elderly Cost Nerd”…
PROVING THINGS 160: DELAY MUST BE EXPLAINED: COURT CAN DIRECT THAT EXTRA EVIDENCE BE FILED
In Hendry v Hendry & Ors [2019] EWHC 1976 (Ch) Master Shuman refused the claimant’s application for an extension of time to bring proceedings under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. THE CASE The claimant was married…
PROVING THINGS 159: A FORMULAIC APPROACH TO EVIDENCE WHICH LEADS TO CONFIRMATION BIAS: THE DANGERS OF PRO FORMA EVIDENCE GATHERING
This blog has looked, several times, at the way in which the family courts look at both expert and lay witness evidence. The judgments of the family courts contain many examples of issues that arise throughout civil litigation. We see…
PROVING THINGS 155: WITNESS EVIDENCE THAT GOES WRONG: HOTEL PROPRIETOR NOT LIABLE TO GUEST FOR ASSAULT BY TRESPASSER
In Al-Najar & Ors v The Cumberland Hotel (London) Ltd [2019] EWHC 1593 (QB) Mr Justice Dingemans found that proprietors of a hotel had not been in breach of duty when some of their guests had been assaulted by a…
WHY THE LYING LITIGANT SHOULD FRET: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON CONTEMPT: WHEN FACEBOOK FLATLY CONTRADICTS PART 18 REPLIES
In Zurich Insurance Plc v Romaine [2019] EWCA Civ 851 allowed an appeal by an insurer so that an application for committal for contempt of court can proceed. No substantive findings of fact have been made. The judgment shows that…
TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE 2: SOCIAL MEDIA NORTH OF THE BORDER: “HE WAS ONE OF A GROUP OF MEN SIMILARLY DRESSED EXCEPT FOR THE TARTAN OF THEIR KILT”
This year sees the first APIL President from Scotland, Gordon Dalyell. As soon as I sent out the previous post on social media a a Scottish Sheriff, Sheriff Cubie, sent me an example of the use of social media in…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 43: CROSS EXAMINING EXPERTS: USEFUL GUIDES AND LINKS
Cross-examining experts is possibly one of the most daunting aspects of advocacy. If an advocate gets into a “debate” with an expert then the advocate normally loses. If the advocate is too brutal the cross-examination can backfire, too supine and…
tWENTY YEARS OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES: ALL THAT TIME AND THEY HAVE MADE FEW FRIENDS
I have already done a post on the 20th anniversary of the Civil Procedure Rules on the 26th April. In an effort to find supporters I tried again. The Civil Procedure Rules, it appears, has very few friends… …
MORE ON THE GREAT BUNDLE TAKEAWAY DEBACLE: A “DIFFICULT” QUESTION OF STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION FOR FAMILY LAWYERS
There has been a large amount of comments on the previous posts in relation to taking away of bundles after trial. For family lawyers there is an even greater problem. The “joint notice” from HMCTS endorsed by the Bar Council…
