DEFENDANT NOT ENTITLED TO INDEMNITY COSTS IF PART 36 OFFER NOT BEATEN: SUCCESS ON COSTS APPEAL HAS MINUSCULE IMPACT ON OVERALL COSTS OF APPEAL
In Shalaby v London North West Healthcare NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 1323 the Court of Appeal upheld the principle that a defendant is not entitled to indemnity costs simply because a claimant has not beaten a Part 36 offer. It…
PROVING THINGS 111: CAUSATION IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES WHERE THERE IS A FAILURE TO WARN: BURDEN OF PROOF REMAINS ON THE CLAIMANT
The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Duce v Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 1307 deals with a number of matters. Here I want to look at the question of proving causation in a case where the…
PROVING THINGS 110: ASSESSING DAMAGES: “BEGIN WITH FIRST PRINCIPLES”: PROVING AND ASSESSING LOSS IN A CLAIM FOR PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE
In Edwards v Hugh James Ford Simey (a firm) [2018] EWCA Civ 1299 the Court of Appeal overturned a finding that the claimant had not established causation for damages in a professional negligence action. When assessing damages the court should begin…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ALLEGATION SHOULD HAVE GONE TO A HEARING: HIGH COURT DECISION: NO REQUIREMENT FOR EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
In Alpha Insurance A/S v Roche & Anor [2018] EWHC 1342 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip found that the circuit judge should have allowed a claim of fundamental dishonesty to be heard. She allowed an appeal and held that the court should…
COURT OF APPEAL STATES THAT NO ORDER FOR COSTS IS THE APPROPRIATE ORDER: “THIS IS A MELANCHOLY TALE”
In Sirketi v Kupeli & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 1264 the Court of Appeal overturned an order for costs in favour of the claimants with an order for no costs. It was, as Lord Justice Hickinbottom observed “a melancholy tale”. The…
PROVING THINGS 106: YOU DIDN’T COMPLY WITH YOUR OWN RISK ASSESSMENT AND YOU WANT TO APPEAL: COURT REJECTS DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENT THAT CLAIMANT FAILED TO PROVE CAUSATION
In CC v Leeds City Council [2018] EWHC 1312 (QB) Mr Justice Turner reiterates the importance of the risk assessment in personal injury litigation. On appeal the judge rejected an argument that a claimant had failed to prove causation. The defendant’s…
PROVING THINGS 105: BURDEN ON CLAIMANT TO PROVE A DEFECT: THE DIFFICULT TASK OF APPEALING FINDINGS OF FACT ON APPEAL
I am grateful to Matthew Snarr for sending me a copy of the judgment, given yesterday, in Bond -v- Tom Croft (Bolton) Ltd [2018] EWHC 1290 QB. It contains an important observation about the burden of proof in establishing that…
FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE BY TRIAL JUDGE: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED
The previous post dealt with a judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer overturning a judgment in favour of the claimant. The judgment in Molodi v Cambridge Vibration Maintenance Service & Anor [2018] EWHC 1288 (QB) is in similar terms. Only on…
CLAIMANTS WERE NOT CREDIBLE: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL SUCCESSFUL: “THE DEFENDANT PRESENTED AN ANSWERABLE CASE THAT THE CLAIMANTS FAILED TO PROVE THEIR CASE”
In Richards & Anor v Morris [2018] EWHC 1289 (QB) the defendant was successful in appealing on the grounds that the trial judge should have made more robust findings from the lack of credibility on the part of the claimants. There…
COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: CROSS -v- BLACK BULL: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED
In January this year I reported the judgment in Cross-v- Black Bull (Doncaster) Limited* (Sheffield County Court 21st December 2017) 072 – Cross v Black Bull – Judgment.Where HH Judge Robinson allowed an appeal where the District Judge had struck out a case…
PROVING THINGS 103: CAUSATION WHEN THE CLAIMANT TRIED TO ESCAPE FROM A BALCONY: A TALE OF TWO JUDGMENTS
There is an interesting consideration of causation in the Court of Appeal judgment today in Clay v TUI UK Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1177. This has the flavour of a case that may go further. There is an interesting dissenting judgment…
I’M NOT TAKING A PLEADING POINT – BUT: FAILURE TO PUT A POINT IN CROSS-EXAMINATION NOT FATAL TO CLAIMANT’S CASE
The judgment in Auckland v Khan & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 1148 is in short form. However it does illustrate the difficulties of appealing on “pleading points” and findings of fact. “There are certainly cases in which the failure to put…
PROVING THINGS 93: PROVING A WILL: THERE ARE SPECIFIC RULES THAT THE PARTIES SHOULD FOLLOW
I cannot remember the last time I read a case where the Court of Appeal heard evidence from witnesses (who had not been heard below) and made a request that it have sight of original documents. This is what happened…
IDENTIFYING THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY AND MAKING A COSTS ORDER: PARTIALLY SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED: DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY 60% OF THE COSTS.
In Wall v Munday [2018] EWHC 879 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) allowed an appeal in relation to costs. The judge at first instance had ordered the claimant to pay 80% of the defendant’s costs. That…
NO LUCK WHEN REACHING FOR THE SKY: LITIGANTS SEEKING A SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY FROM THE TRIAL JUDGE GET SHORT SHRIFT
In an earlier post about the case of P (A Child), Re [2018] EWCA Civ 720 we looked at an example where the parties (all the parties in the case) had correctly used the guidance in English v Emery Reimbold and Strick Ltd [2002]…
LEAVE TO APPEAL, APPEAL NOTICES AND THE NEED TO APPLY TO AMEND: COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS CRUCIAL: KNOW THE RULES
In Hickey v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2018] EWCA Civ 851 the Court of Appeal set out, in categorical terms, that parties should comply with the provisions relating to permission to appeal. In particular a party cannot…
LIEN, THE SOLICITOR AND THE INSURER: NO SAFE HAVEN FOR DEFENDANTS
The judgment of the Supreme Court this morning in Gavin Edmondson Solicitors Ltd v Haven Insurance Company Ltd [2018] UKSC 21. It confirms that solicitors are entitled to costs in cases where the defendant’s insurer, knowing of the solicitor’s involvement, settled…
MAKING UNWARRANTED ASSERTIONS LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS – AGAINST A SECRETARY OF STATE
There are numerous cases where the courts have considered conduct that leads to indemnity costs. In Secretary of State for the Home Department v Barry [2018] EWCA Civ 790 the Court of Appeal found that the Home Department’s conduct of an…
WHEN FACT FINDING GOES WRONG: APPEALS TO THE COURT OF APPEAL WHEN THERE ARE DELAYS BY THE JUDGE
I am going to leave it to the family law bloggers to analyse all the implications of the judgment in P (A Child), Re [2018] EWCA Civ 720. It involves all parties in a case agreeing that the fact finding process at…
YOU APPEAL DECISIONS NOT REASONS: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED IN RELATION TO AN ARGUMENT THAT DID NOT CHANGE OUTCOME OF THE CASE
In Civilians v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 690 (QB) Mr Justice Leggatt rejected the defendant’s application for permission to appeal. The proposed appeal was wholly academic in the sense that it had no impact on the outcome of the case. THE…
APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY: IF YOU WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT THEN MAKE SURE YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR IT
On the 18th April 2018 I am, with a number of my colleagues from Hardwicke, giving a talk on “Applications for Defendants”*. The judgment this week in St Clair v King & Anor [2018] EWHC 682 (Ch) may well feature. It…
A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS NOT AN OPEN INVITATION TO TAKE A SECOND BITE AT THE CHERRY: AN OVERUSED TACTIC
In Gosvenor London Ltd v Aygun Aluminium UK Ltd [2018] EWHC 227 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser made it clear that draft judgments were not to be taken as an invitation to the parties to embark on a second round of submissions….
MISTAKES, APPEALS, DENTON AND LITIGANTS IN PERSON: “JUDGES DIFFER, ONE FROM ANOTHER, IN SMALL, HUMAN, WAYS”
In EDF Energy Customers Ltd v Re-Energized Ltd [2018] EWHC 652 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) carried out a comprehensive review of the authorities relating to the latitude to be afforded to litigants in person. It…
WHEN THE JUDGE IS ENTITLED NOT TO DECIDE ON THE EVIDENCE: PLUS THE IMPORTANT ISSUE OF CONDUCT AND COSTS
The Court of Appeal decision today in Constandas v Lysandrou & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 613 illustrates two distinct issues: The position when a judge is unable to make a finding on the evidence. What conduct can lead to a successful…
OVER-LISTING HAS CONSEQUENCES : (SO DOES TALKING OVER YOUR OPPONENT): HEARINGS SHOULD NOT BECOME A “SHOUTING MATCH”
There is a page on this blog where I am attempting to collate problems with listing (across all jurisdictions). The judgment reported today in A v R & Anor (Appeal of Summary Determination) [2018] EWHC 521 provides a reminder that listing…
CHANGING FROM LEGAL AID TO A CFA: JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: DEFENDANTS’ APPEAL ALLOWED: ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES NOT RECOVERABLE
I am grateful to Sean Linley of PIC costings for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgement in Surrey -v- Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 451. This is the latest in the…
SKELETON ARGUMENTS: GET THE FONT SIZE RIGHT, AND THE LENGTH CORRECT: OR IT COULD COST YOU
The Administrative Court Clerks Users Group has sent out an email to many chambers in relation to the format of skeleton arguments. If you did not receive this it is worth reading. THE EMAIL: SIZE AND FONTS OF SKELETON ARGUMENTS…
THE DENTON PRINCIPLES: CAN YOU BLAME A REPRESENTATIVE? SHOULD LITIGANTS IN PERSON BE TREATED MORE LENIENTLY?
The Denton principles were considered by the First-Tier Tribunal Tax Chamber in Clarke v Revenue and Customs (PROCEDURE : Other) [2018] UKFTT 123 (TC). Here we look at two particular parts of the judgment: (i) the relevance of reliance on an…
COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS REFUSAL OF EXTENSION OF TIME IN FOREIGN JUDGMENTS CASE: JUDGMENT TODAY
A post in 2015 looked at the decision in In Christofi -v- National Bank of Greece (Cyprus) Ltd [2015] EWHC 986 (QB) Mrs Justice Andrews DBE held that there were very limited grounds for extending time in an appeal against the registration of…
COSTS ON APPEAL – TWO ISSUES: COSTS AWARDED WHERE THERE WAS NO SCHEDULE BELOW: INDEMNITY COSTS WHEN A PARTY HAD MADE AN OFFER TO COMPROMISE AN APPEAL
An earlier post dealt with the substantive decision in Cross-v- Black Bull (Doncaster) Limited* (Sheffield County Court 21st December 2017). A short supplementary judgment dealt with two issues as to costs. KEY POINTS The fact that a party did not have a…
WHO SHOULD PAY WHAT WHEN A PART 36 OFFER IS WITHDRAWN? HIGH COURT DECISION: COSTS LIABILITY DOES NOT RUN FROM THE DATE OF AN OFFER THAT IS WITHDRAWN
In Ballard v Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 370 (QB) Mr Justice Foskett considered the impact of a Part 36 offer that had been withdrawn. He overturned an order that the claimant should pay the costs from the date…
EXTENSIONS OF TIME FOR SERVICE WERE PROPERLY GRANTED: APPLICATIONS TO SET ASIDE ARE A REHEARING NOT A REVIEW: HIGH COURT DECISION
Another week, another case about service of the claim form. This time the claimant was more successful. In DDM v Al-Zahra (PVT) Hospital & Ors [2018] EWHC 346 (QB). Mr Justice Foskett allowed an appeal against a Master’s decision setting aside…
WHEN QOCS APPLY: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: THE SWINGS AND THE ROUNDABOUTS
In Corstorphine (An Infant) v Liverpool City Council [2018] EWCA Civ 270 the Court of Appeal considered an important issue in relation to Qualified One Costs Shifting. What order should be made when the claimant has QOCS protection against some of…
BARTON -V- WRIGHT HASSALL: JUDGMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT TODAY: A DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF THE MAJORITY JUDGMENT
It is rare for issues relating to procedure to reach the Supreme Court. The judgment today in Barton -v- Wright Hassall LLP [2018] UKSC 12 concerned the issue of correct service of the claim form. The claimant lost the appeal (albeit…
CLAIM FORMS IN THE SUPREME COURT: SERVICE BY EMAIL NOT GOOD SERVICE: NO SPECIAL RULES FOR A LITIGANT IN PERSON
The Supreme Court dismissed the claimant’s appeal in Barton -v- Wright Hassall [2018] UKSC 12. Service by email on a solicitor who had not confirmed they would accept service was not good service. A claimant would not be granted any…
LIMITATION PERIOD RUNS FROM DATE OF COMPLETION OF WORK: AGREED TERMS FOR PAYMENT DO NOT EXTEND LIMITATION PERIOD
In Ice Architects Ltd v Empowering People Inspiring Communities (Rev 1) [2018] EWHC 281 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert found that the six year contractual limitation period ran from the date of completion of work and not the date of invoice. A…
PART 36 AND INTERIM PAYMENTS: SOMETHING TO BE WARY ABOUT : COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
The case of Gamal v Synergy Lifestyle Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 210 is one that needs to be read with great care. A defendant who made a voluntary interim payment after making a Part 36 offer. The effect of this was…
SECTION 33 IN AN INDUSTRIAL DEAFNESS CASE: COURT OF APPEAL SAYS NO
We are looking again at the decision in Carr v Panel Products (Kimpton) Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 190 This was the first time the Court of Appeal had considered Section 33 of the Limitation Act since the decision in Carroll v Chief…
LIMITATION: DATE OF KNOWLEDGE: IT IS A MATTER OF FACT
I used to write a section/chapter on limitation in a legal looseleaf. The part on “date of knowledge” was, of course, my favourite*. Section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980 has led to many cases in relation to date of…
APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE PROPOSED RESPONDENT CAN HAVE THEIR SAY
An interesting point arose in the Court of Appeal decision today in Carr v Panel Products (Kimpton) Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 190. When a party seeks permission to appeal from the trial judge – can the other party make submissions in…
OVERTURNING THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS FOR A COMMITTAL: THE AMOUNTS INVOLVED WERE “DISPROPORTIONATE AND WRONG
The previous post looked at the Court of Appeal decision today in Solanki v Intercity Telecom Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 101. A third element of that judgment was the defendant’s successful appeal against the costs of a committal application. The Court held…
JUDGE WAS WRONG NOT TO GRANT ADJOURNMENT ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH AND TO REFUSE TO SET ASIDE SUBSEQUENT JUDGMENT
In Solanki v Intercity Telecom Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 101 today the Court of Appeal overturned a decision discussed on this blog in 2015. The Court found that a judge should have granted a defendant an adjournment on ill-health grounds. He…
MOVING THE APPEAL TRIBUNAL FURTHER & FURTHER AWAY FROM THE APPELLANT’S HOME: PROCEDURAL UNFAIRNESS
Earlier this week I paid tribute to Sir Henry Brooke. This included his most recent work dealing with PIPs and ESAs. He wrote in his blog: “Readers of these blogs will know I have been telling stories of the injustices…
WANT TO WORK HARD, WIN AND STILL NOT GET PAID II? LAWYERS COME TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: REVIEW YOUR RETAINER CAREFULLY
In Radford & Anor v Frade & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 119 the Court of Appeal upheld the early decisions that lawyers, who worked outside the terms of their retainer under a CFA, could not recover costs from the unsuccessful party….
DENTON APPLIED TO LATE APPEAL: SUBMITTING SUBMISSIONS AFTER A HEARING AND THE NEED FOR CAUTION WHEN SEEKING DAMAGES UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT
In Fayad, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 54 the Court of Appeal applied the Denton principles to a late appeal. Permission to appeal was refused. Mr Justice Singh had…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED ON APPEAL: WHEN A CLAIMANT DIGS A BIG HOLE FOR THEMSELVES THE COURT SHOULD NOT STRUGGLE TO EXTRACT THEM
In London Organising Committee of the Olympic And Paralympic Games (LOCOG) v Sinfield [2018] EWHC 51 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles overturned a decision whereby a claimant was allowed damages. The claimant had been fundamentally dishonest in making a claim for…
WHEN THE PLEADINGS APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN PUT IN THE PAPER BIN AT TRIAL (SHADES OF THE OFFICE)
The judgment in Premier Paper Group Ltd v Buchanan McPherson Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 15 contains some interesting observations about the way in which the parties departed from their pleadings. Although the claim succeeded this case how important it is that…
THE BRIAN MAY COSTS CASE: TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE: PROPORTIONALITY APPEAL DID NOT BITE THE DUST
Thanks to the good offices of the ACL the judgment on appeal of May -v- Wavell Group Ltd is now available here. The claimant’s appeal on the issue of proportionality was allowed. The figure of £35,000 plus vat for costs…
COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT ALLOWED: CROSS -v- BLACK BULL – THE FULL JUDGMENT
I reported the judgment in Cross-v- Black Bull (Doncaster) Limited* (Sheffield County Court 21st December 2017) at the end of last year. The full judgment is now available and is attached here 072 – Cross v Black Bull – Judgment A SUMMARY The…
“SOMETIMES AN UNIMPRESSIVE WITNESS SPEAKS THE TRUTH”: FACT FINDING AND THE CIVIL COURTS: PRIVY COUNCIL OVERTURN FINDINGS OF FACT
In Cleare v The Attorney General & Ors (Bahamas) [2017] UKPC 38 the Privy Council was scathing of the method of fact finding of the trial judge. The judge erred in failing to consider the significance of medical evidence. ” It…
You must be logged in to post a comment.