SEEK PERMISSION TO APPEAL PROMPTLY (AND TELL THE JUDGE ABOUT IT): “A close analysis of the parties’ cases thus reveals a fractal pattern of progressively complex and ever-finer recursive detail of sharply declining significance.”
The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Município De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group Plc & Anor [2020] EWHC 2471 (TCC) discloses an unusual turn of events in relation to an appeal. It contains some important observations about the…
THE LIMITATION PERIOD, PERSONAL INJURY AND THE RESTORATION OF A COMPANY: A HIGH COURT DECISION
In Holmes v S & B Concrete Ltd [2020] EWHC 2277 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer considered the issues surrounding the claimant’s argument that the limitation period in a personal injury action was suspended when a company was wound up….
CORONAVIRUS LAW: COVID AND CONTACT BETWEEN PARENTS AND CHILD
The number of cases dealing with issues relating to COVID have reduced. However issues still arise. In the judgement today in D-S (Contact With Children In Care: Covid-19) [2020] EWCA Civ 1031 the Court of Appeal set out clear principles…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED: CPR 3.9 PROPERLY APPLIED IS ARTICLE 6 COMPLIANT
The previous two posts on this blog have been warning against complacency in relation to the Denton principles. This is the third in that series. In Magee v Willmott [2020] EWHC 1378 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip allowed an appeal in…
JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO STRIKE OUT ACTION AGAINST NON-EXISTENT COMPANY: ALSO GUIDANCE FOR INSURERS ON MOST PRUDENT COURSE OF ACTION
In the judgment in Cowley v LW Carlisle & Company Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 227 today the Court of Appeal dismissed the claimant’s appeal against an order striking out his claim against one defendant. At the time the striking out…
A DECISION THAT WAS “UNJUST BECAUSE OF SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY AND MULTIPLE ERRORS OF LAW”: WHEN DECISIONS ARE NOT BASED ON THE EVIDENCE
I have hesitated before writing about the judgment in H v F [2020] EWHC 86 (Fam). The judgment reviews a highly disturbing first instance decision. I know that many family law commentators have already commented on the case and I…
THE SELF INFLICTED WOUNDS OF A “TRUSTED BRAND”/”CAPRICIOUS MID-VICTORIAN FACTORY-OWNER”: THE DANGERS OF PUTTING YOUR CASE TOO HIGH
The judgment of Lord Justice Coulson rejecting the Post Office’s application for permission to appeal is available on “Post Office Trial“, a case that has already been looked at several times on this blog. Here we have a critical appraisal…
STAGE 3 PROCEEDINGS AND LATE SERVICE OF EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
The judgment of the Court of Appeal yesterday in Wickes Building Supplies Ltd v Blair [2019] EWCA Civ 1934 is an important one in relation to late service of evidence and Stage 3 of the Protocol. It shows the importance…
THE TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE LEADS TO QOCS BEING DISAPPLIED
In Haider v DSM Demolition Ltd [2019] EWHC 2712 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles refused a claimant’s appeal against a finding that the defendant was not negligent. He granted the defendant relief from sanctions and allowed an appeal against a…
PROVING THINGS 164: THE NEED FOR A CAR FOR PRIVATE PURPOSES IS NOT SELF PROVING AND THE COURT WILL NOT INFER SUCH A NEED.
In Hussain v EUI Ltd [2019] EWHC 2647 (QB) Mr Justice Pepperall dismissed a claimant’s appeal in relation to the assessment of damages. “Need for social and domestic purposes is not self-proving and, in this case, cannot simply be inferred”…
DISTRICT JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE “PARTIALLY” RECUSED THEMSELVES: THINGS THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: A VERY INTERESTING ASSESSMENT OF COSTS…
I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF for providing me a copy of the judgment in Akers -v- Kirlkland [2019] EWHC 2176 (QB) Mr Justice Waksman discussed, in detail, the circumstances in which a judge should recuse themselves and…
THE TRIAL JUDGE COULD SAY BULLOCKS TO THE COST ORDER: ON APPEAL, HOWEVER, THE CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SO BULLISH
In Fouladi v Darout Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 1674 (Ch) Mr Justice Henry Carr refused an appeal against the making of a “Bullock” order in relation to the costs of a fourth defendant. The claimant, however, was not successful…
EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SERVICE SET ASIDE: THE DANGERS OF SEEKING TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF A CLAIM FORM ON A WITHOUT NOTICE BASIS – EXEMPLIFIED
In Al-Zahra (PVT) Hospital & Ors v DDM [2019] EWCA Civ 1103 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by defendants who objected to an extension of time being granted for service of the claim form. It is an object…
MOTOR INSURERS BUREAU IS LIABLE TO COVER VEHICLE BEING DRIVEN OFF ROAD: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In Motor Insurers’ Bureau v Lewis [2019] EWCA Civ 909 the Court of Appeal upheld the finding of Mr Justice Soole that the Motor Insurers Bureau were liable to indemnify the driver of a vehicle that was being driven “off…
“VERY UNFORTUNATELY, ON TWO OCCASIONS… THE … JUDGE FELL ASLEEP”: APPEAL ALLOWED
In Science Museum Group v Wess [2019] UKEAT 0260 HHJ Auberach made a finding that the Employment Judge had fallen asleep. The appeal was allowed on this ground alone. “I find as a fact that, very unfortunately, on the afternoon…
DRAFT JUDGMENTS “ARE NOT AN INVITATION TO TREAT”: COURT OF APPEAL SEEKS TO PUT AN END TO REQUEST THAT ARE “CONFRONTATIONAL AND DISRESPECTFUL”
In I Children [2019] EWCA Civ 898 the Court of Appeal gave clear guidance to practitioners who write to the court seeking “clarification” of a written judgment. There are clear parameters and the parties should not use the draft judgment…
“THIS WAS A DECISION TAKEN ON FACTS UNSUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE”: MASSIVE INCOMPETENCE BY THE PAROLE BOARD: WHERE TWO CASES GET CONFUSED – HOW CAN WE SLEEP AT NIGHT?
It is unusual for this blog to look at decisions relating to Parole Board. However the careful gathering and analysis of evidence is central to every litigator’s role. A remarkable set of facts is outlined in the judgment of HHJ…
COURT OF APPEAL: NOT TOO KEEN ON PERMISSION BEING GRANTED FOR “ACADEMIC” ARGUMENTS
In J-S (Children) [2019] EWCA Civ 894, the Court of Appeal declined to hear an argument that was “academic”. It also gave guidance to judges when considering applications for permission to appeal on the “other compelling reason for an appeal”…
PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE RELEVANT TEST: NO REQUIREMENT THAT SUCCESS BE PROBABLE OR MORE LIKELY THAN NOT
In R (A Child) [2019] EWCA Civ 895 the Court of Appeal set out the criteria for permission for appeal. “The test for the grant of permission to appeal on an application to the Court of Appeal or to the…
APPEALING FINDINGS OF FACT: THE UPHILL BATTLE
In Staechelin & Ors v ACLBDD Holdings Ltd & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 817 Lord Justice Lewison set out a “cut out and keep” guide for parties attempting to appeal findings of fact. A reminder of the uphill battle that appellants…