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…
A TINY BIT MORE ON BUNDLES AND THE TAKEAWAY CONDUNDRUM
The earlier post set out HMCTS guidance in relation to the taking away of documents after a hearing. At the same time as HMCTS prepared the Joint Notice the Bar Council issued an explanatory note “Many of you will be…
ADVICE FOR THE ASPIRANT OR TYRO LAWYER: WHEN TWITTER CAN BE YOUR FRIEND (IN FACT YOU CAN HAVE DOZENS OF FRIENDS GIVING YOU ADVICE)
This is a post started almost by accident. It started with a tweet when a barrister was happy to be sitting on her sofa, for a change and said this is the reality of legal life. It led to dozens…
FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY WHEN THEY ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF CONSENT ORDER: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL IN THE COUNTY COURT
I am grateful to Sam Hayman and Tom Jenkinson from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Wulkwik in Miss Seyi Adelekun -v- Mrs Siu Lai Ho. (Central London County Court 18/10/2018). A…
THE CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS SERIES 20: A RECAP
The purpose of this series is to provide short and basic summaries of some of the key points of civil procedure. Often a post is due to an observation made in a recent case, a comment on Twitter or a…
COSTS WHERE A PARTY SUES A NUMBER OF DEFENDANTS: DEFENDANTS ORDERED TO PAY SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS: HIGH COURT APPEAL
I am grateful to Thomas Riis-Bristow, Associate Solicitor at Irwin Mitchell, for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Lavender in McDermott -v- Inhealth Limited (19/07/2018), This deals with the issue of the appropriate costs order when…
COURT STEPS OUTSIDE THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT AMOUNTED TO AN ABUSE
The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) guards its fixed costs regime very jealously. Prior to the decision in Link Up Mitaka Ltd (t/a Thebigword) v Language Empire Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 2728 there appears to have only been one previous…
THE JUDGE’S ROLE WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT ATTEND TRIAL: SECTION 33 APPLICATION ALLOWED WHEN PROCEEDINGS ISSUED 22 YEARS AFTER ASSAULTS
In the judgment today in LXA & Anor v Willcox [2018] EWHC 2256 (QB) His Honour Judge Robinson (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) had to consider two issues: (i) the appropriate role of the judge when a…
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON CONSTRUCTION OF PART 36: IT IS NOT A PART 36 OFFER JUST BECAUSE THE PARTIES SAY SO: OFFERS CAN ONLY BE ASSESSED BY REFERENCE TO THE PLEADINGS
In Hertel & Anor v Saunders & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 1831 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that an offer made was not a valid Part 36 offer. It was held that a Part 36 offer had to be…