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…
NEWTON’S LAW AND COMMUNICATING WITH THE COURT: THE NEED FOR PARTIES TO GO THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE
There are is brief passage in the judgment of Mr Recorder Allen QC in G v C [2020] EWFC B35 (OJ) (16 July 2020) that is of general application. “The communication has served to demonstrate Newton’s third law of…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED WHEN JUDGE HAD RESERVATIONS AS TO WHETHER STRIKING OUT ORDER SHOULD EVER HAVE BEEN MADE
In Barakat v Greycourt Ltd [2020] EWHC 643 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt granted relief from sanctions to an appellant whose appeal had been struck out without notice. One thing of note in this judgment is the order striking out the…
AMENDING PLEADINGS? HAVE A DRAFT AT COURT: JUDGE CONSIDERS “CIRCULAR ARGUMENTS” AND A “PARTICULARLY UNFORTUNATE PROCEDURAL LITIGATION HISTORY”
The judgment of HHJ Gore QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Sivaji v Ministry of Defence [2020] EWHC 2006 (QB) makes interesting reading. It is an object lesson in the need to have an amended pleading to hand…
POINTS TAKEN ON APPLICATION WERE “ALL BAD”: PARTIES TO LITIGATION ARE NOT BOUND TO TAKE BAD OR HOPELESS POINTS
The judgment of Master Davison in Vale SA v BSG Resources Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2021 (Comm) contains some interesting observations on the “state of litigation”. “The points taken on Mr Cramer’s behalf were not a mixture of…
SETTING ASIDE AN ORDER MADE WITHOUT A HEARING OR MADE WITHOUT NOTICE : THE RELEVANT CRITERIA
The previous post looked at the judgment in Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin). In that judgment Mostyn J stated that there was no authority on the issue of the criteria when…
COSTS ORDERS MADE WITHOUT A HEARING: HENRY VIII AND THE RELEVANT CRITERIA FOR VARYING ORDERS
We are looking again (and not for the last time) at the decision of Mr Justice Mostyn in Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin). This time on the question on the…
GET YOUR COSTS SCHEDULES TO COURT: OR ELSE (YOU WON’T GET PAID): MAKE YOUR BED AND THEN LIE IN IT
The judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin)has a number of elements that are of interest to costs lawyers, and litigators generally. I am going to…
ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT BECAUSE ALLEGATIONS OF BAD FAITH AND WILFUL MISCONDUCT NOT FULLY PARTICULARISED
In Palladian Partners LP & Ors v The Republic of Argentina & Anor [2020] EWHC 1946 (Comm) Mrs Justice Cockerill refused to strike out pleadings alleging, bad faith, wilful misconduct and manifest error. This is the second example recently of…
“INTEMPERATE DEBATE” IN LEGAL CORRESPONDENCE: A REVIEW OF THE GUIDANCE AND CASES
The judgment yesterday in Collier & Ors v Bennett [2020] EWHC 1884 (QB) contained some judicial observations as to “intemperate debate” in correspondence. This provides an opportunity to review guidance and judicial observations on this topic. THE CASE The judge…
DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: EXTENSION OF TIME GRANTED FOLLOWING DEFAULT IN AN EXTRADITION CASE
In Zelenko v Prosecutor General’s Office of the Republic of Latvia [2020] EWHC 1800 (Admin) the Administrative Court applied Denton principles to an issue concerning extradition. THE CASE An order had been made extraditing the applicant to Latvia. The…
THE STATEMENT OF CASE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: JUDGE PROVIDES A LESSON IN THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PLEADING
In Tejani v Fitzroy Place Residential Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 1856 (TCC) Mr Justice Pepperall sent out a clear reminder of the basic purpose of pleading. He rejected an argument by the defendant that a particulars of claim should…
ALLEGATIONS OF JUDICIAL BIAS REJECTED: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Ameyaw v McGoldrick & Ors [2020] EWHC 1787 (QB) Mrs Justice Steyn refused an application that she recuse herself. The first part of the judgment summarises the law in relation to bias when the judge knows the counsel involved….
WHEN SHOULD A SOLICITOR MAKE A WITNESS STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS? A REVIEW OF THE CASES
Last week I gave an in-house talk to a London firm of solicitors.* One of the matters we discussed was when (if ever) it was appropriate for a solicitor to make a witness statement in support of an interlocutory application. …
ARGUING YOUR CASE THROUGH THE WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS MAY NOT END WELL
Yesterday I wrote about the judgment in Skatteforvaltningen (The Danish Customs And Tax Administration) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2020] EWHC 1624 (Comm). In particular the very vigorous judicial disapproval of an attempt to “argue” the case by way…
WITNESS STATEMENTS “NOT IN MY STOCK IN TRADE”: HIGH COURT JUDGE HIGHLY CRITICAL OF ARGUMENTATIVE AND LARGELY IRRELEVANT WITNESS STATEMENTS
Last week I wrote about the report on witness evidence working group of the business and property courts. That report commented that drafting witness statements (more accurately evidence in chief) was no longer part of a lawyer’s “stock in trade”. …
CORONAVIRUS LAW: SHOULD A HEARING BE IN PERSON OR BY VIDEO?
In Surrey Heath Borough Council v Robb & Ors [2020] EWHC 1650 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman considered submissions that a hearing should take place in person. He held that there was an onus on part requesting a hearing in court…
WEBINARS ON LAW, PROCEDURE AND DAMAGES: READ ALL ABOUT THEM…
Since lockdown has made giving live presentations impossible I have been involved in presenting a number of webinars. This would seem a good time to set them out. Those that have been given earlier this year are still available on…
LIFE EXPECTANCY IS RARELY A SIMPLE MATTER OF STATISTICS: APPLYING FOR A “VARIATION” OF DIRECTIONS: YOU SHOULD HAVE APPEALED
In the judgment this morning in Chaplin v Ben Pistol Allianz Insurance Plc [2020] EWHC 1543 (QB) Jay J rejected an application by the defendant to rely on expert evidence in relation to life expectancy. This judgment is important…
THE “BACK TO BASICS” SERIES 80: THE POSTS SO FAR
The “back to basics” series has been going since April 2018. It has covered a surprising amount of topics. From how to draft an application to “litigation wishful thinking”. Two years on this is a good time to recap on…