TRANSFER FROM COUNTY COURT TO HIGH COURT: YOU CAN ASK FOR THIS ONLY ONCE: A DISCRETION TO BE EXERCISED “WITH GREAT CIRCUMSPECTION”
In Bass v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 1297 (QB) Master Davison held it was an abuse of process for a party to make an application to transfer to the High Court when a similar application had been made, and refused,…
“AVOIDING PAROCHIALISM”: TRANSFER BETWEEN DIVISIONS – NO EVIDENCE ONE DIVISION IS BETTER THAN ANOTHER
In Mezvinsky & Anor v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2018] EWHC 1261 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh refused an application to transfer from the Business and Property Courts to the Media and Communications List. “the court hearing an application for transfer must be…
PROVING THINGS 94: : THE DEFENDANT WANTS TO CHOOSE BOTH THE CLAIMANT’S LITIGATION FRIEND AND SOLICITOR: EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT FAR FROM COMPELLING
There are some audacious applications. However an application by defendants that attempts to dictate who the claimant’s litigation friend should be, and who their solicitor should be, should – at the very least – be backed up by firm evidence. …
DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED TO A CASE WHERE A CLAIMANT FAILED TO GET PERMISSION TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS
Although the Denton principles are much more settled it is prudent to keep a weather eye on cases where they are considered. His Honour Judge Davis-White QC (sitting as a judge of the Chancery Division in Leeds) applied the Denton principles in a…
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]…
THE CLEVELAND BRIDGE CASE: A SECOND CROSSING: PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS
Judgments dealing with payments on account of costs are rare, but illuminating. Particularly when the costs budget is taken as the starting point. There is a detailed consideration of this issue in Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Sarens (UK) Ltd [2018]…
CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 2: “EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT” OF AN APPLICATION
The previous post looked at some of the basic requirements of an application to the court. Here we look at the evidence that may be needed in support of an application. The key point here being “evidence”. Numerous hours are…
CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 1: THE HUMBLE APPLICATION: WORDING AND TIMING
Last year I was giving an in-house talk at a very prominent firm of litigation solicitors. The litigation partner present (a person of immense experience) made the point that the firm were continually having talks and education on esoteric and…
“PERSUASION”: APPLICATIONS & EVIDENCE: ATTEND A COURSE AND SUPPORT CHILDREN’S LITERACY: 18th APRIL 2018 – LINCOLN’S INN
On the 18th April 2018 I am involved in a talk at Hardwicke, in Lincoln’s Inn. With a number of my colleagues we are talking on “Persuasion” Applications and Evidence for Defendants and Insurers”. All proceeds go directly to a…
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….
THE TIME FOR CHALLENGING A BILL HAS PROBABLY LONG GONE: AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN REFUSING AN APPLICATION FOR DELIVERY UP
There is a battle (or a series of skirmishes) going on at present in relation to solicitors charging success fees to their clients in personal injury cases. This has led to numerous applications to the courts for disclosure. The former…
NO “GRANDSTANDING” PLEASE: THE COURT IS NOT ASSISTED BY RHETORICAL POINTS
It has been a week for the courts commenting on advocates. Earlier we had complaints of advocates interrupting each other. Today we have complaints of “grandstanding”. Reminding advocates that their task is to deal with the legal issues at hand…
THE LIMITATION PERIOD IS JUST ABOUT TO EXPIRE AND YOU ARE NOT READY: FIVE KEY POINTS FOR WHEN YOU DICE WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH
No matter how hard litigators try (and how many warnings are given) it appears inevitable that, sooner or later, you are going to have a case where the limitation period is about to expire but you are not ready. The…
PARTIES MUST OBTAIN AN ORDER FOR A HEARING OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: (MORE ON LENGTHY SKELETON ARGUMENTS)
In Bokova v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2018] EWHC 320 (QB) Mr Justice Dingemans considered several important issues of procedure. Firstly the need for parties to obtain an order for a hearing on a preliminary issue rather than simply turning up on…
TIME ESTIMATES: PROBLEMS WHEN THE ESTIMATES ARE TOO SHORT: STILL LOOKING FOR GUIDANCE
I have been searching (so far unsuccessfully) for guidance to litigators and litigants to help provide accurate time estimates. This may well be more of an art than a science. However it is a skill that needs honing. Not only…
THE COURT “REGRETTED IF NOT DEPLORED” EXCESSIVE EXPENDITURE ON JURISDICTION ISSUES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Ogale Community & Ors v Royal Dutch Shell Plc & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 191 the Court of Appeal made observations about the need to keep applications about jurisdiction in proportion. “… hearings concerning the issue of appropriate forum should…
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…
THE PROBLEM IN OBTAINING AN ORDER YOU HAVEN’T ASKED FOR:AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 3.4 WILL NOT BE TREATED AS AN APPLICATION UNDER PART 24
The judgment of Chief Master Marsh in Saeed & Anor v Ibrahim & Ors [2018] EWHC 3 (Ch) contains several important observations in relation to making applications. The Master refused to treat an application, ostensibly made under CPR 3.4, as an…
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…
CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2017 (I): “SURVIVING THE EMOTIONS OF LITIGATION” & “THINGS THAT IRRITATE JUDGES”
This is the fourth annual review on this blog. This year I have decided to break it into a number of reviews. First it is interesting to look at what is being read on this site and the search terms…
CIVIL LITIGATION AND THE MARTIAL ARTS: MCGANN -V- BISPING: ROUND 3: LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND “IMPLICIT” ORDERS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS
We have already looked twice at the “sparring” arguments in relation to procedure in the case of McGann v Bisping [2017] EWHC 2951 (Comm). A further procedural issue arose as to whether a party was debarred from calling evidence at all. The…
AFTER THE EVENT INSURANCE DOES NOT PROHIBIT AN ORDER FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS
In Premier Motorauctions Ltd & Anor v Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 1872 the Court of Appeal decided that the existence of an after the event insurance policy to cover legal expenses did not prohibit a court from ordering…
SUING THE WRONG DEFENDANT? SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS?
It is always embarrassing to find out you are suing the wrong defendant and have to apply for substitution (although we have looked at cases in which the wrong claimant has issued proceedings). This issue was considered by Mr Justice…
COSTS AFTER DISCONTINUANCE VARIED: CLAIMANT TO PAY INDEMNITY NOT STANDARD COSTS: TWO RIGHT FEET BROUGHT THE WRONG ACTION
When a claimant discontinues an action there is an automatic provision that the claimant pay the defendant’s costs (CPR 38.6). In Two Right Feet Ltd v National Westminster Bank Plc & Ors [2017] EWHC 1745 (Ch) Ms Sara Cockerill Q.C. made…
THE DENTON CRITERIA AND DISHONESTY: TELLING A LIE MAY NOT BE “SIGNIFICANT” BUT IT IS ALWAYS SERIOUS.
I am grateful to John McQuater for sending me through a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Robinson in the case of Wadsley -v- Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (a copy of that judgment is available here Wadsley…
LEAVING ISSUE UNTIL THE LAST MOMENT – ALWAYS DANGEROUS : PARTICULARLY WHEN A CLAIMANT IS ON NOTICE OF POTENTIAL PROBLEMS
In Hall v Environment Agency [2017] EWHC 1309 (TCC) His Honour Judge Havelock-Allan QC pointed out the dangers of leaving issue until the last moment, particularly in cases where there were likely to be procedural issues relating to jurisdiction. THE CASE…
DEFENDANT IN CASE WITH PROTECTED PARTY ENTITLED TO RESILE FROM “COMPROMISE”: REQUIREMENT FOR COURT APPROVAL NOT A BREACH OF ECHR RIGHTS
In Revill v Damiani [2017] EWHC 2630 (QB) Mr Justice Dingemans held that the rule that required a protected party to obtain a court order to approve a proposed settlement remained good law. It did not breach the claimant’s human rights….
LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER DID NOT TAKE THE HEART OUT OF THE USUAL RULES AS TO COSTS: PART 36.13 CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: CLAIMANT SURVIVES A HEATED ATTACK
I am grateful to Thomas Riis-Bristow from Irwin Mitchell solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Truman in Knibbs -v-Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust (23/6/2017). It is an interesting (and important) consideration of…
PERMISSION TO APPEAL – TWO YEARS OUT OF TIME – SET ASIDE: COURT WAS “MISLED BY SERIOUS MISREPRESENTATIONS AND NON DISCLOSURES”
In Kovarska v Otkritie International Investment Management Ltd & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 1485 the Court of Appeal set aside an extension of time for appealing. The order had been granted without a hearing. It was held that the Court…
“BREATHTAKINGLY RUDE” LETTERS INDICATED AN INTENT TO ABUSE THE PROCESS: DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT IN FAILING TO PAY FOR PITCH CROSSED THE LINE
In Bernard Sport Surfaces Ltd v Astrosoccer4u Ltd [2017] EWHC 2425 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson had strong words to say about correspondence and conduct which, he held, were simply attempts to avoid a debt that was lawfully due. “… all of…
NOT PROCEEDING WITH LITIGATION FOR ONE YEAR IS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE ACTION WAS NOT BEING “WAREHOUSED”: BUT STILL A POINT TO WATCH
In Grenda Investments Ltd v Barton [2017] EWHC 2371 (Comm)Mr Justice Picken considered (and rejected) an argument that the claimant’s failure to proceed with litigation for a year amounted to an abuse of process. Although the application failed this case does…
DISPUTE BETWEEN SOLICITORS: PERMISSION TO AMEND REFUSED AS IT WAS A COLLATERAL ATTACK ON AN EARLIER DECISION: CONCESSION MADE BY MISTAKE CANNOT BE WITHDRAWN
In Mark Lewis Law Ltd & Anor v Taylor Hampton Solicitors Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 2359 (QB) Mrs Justice Whipple DBE refused an application by the defendant solicitors to amend its counterclaim shortly before trial. It is a case that…
ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE: PUTTING IN THE POST ON REQUISITE DATE IS GOOD SERVICE: NO SAFE HARBOUR FOR DEFENDANTS ON THIS ISSUE
Master McCloud has already made observations about the ” dry and unlovely crop of procedural service issues” that are regularly coming before the Masters. Another issue was considered in Jones v Chichester Harbour Conservancy & Ors [2017] EWHC 2270. “… the correct…
SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT PERMISSION: THE COURT HAS POWER TO RECTIFY THE POSITION RETROSPECTIVELY
Can the court rectify the situation when a claimant, who requires permission to continue proceedings, has issued and served without such permission? That was the question considered by His Honour Judge Davis-White QC in Wilton UK Ltd v Shuttleworth & Ors…
NO SPECIAL FORM OF “MEDIATION PRIVILEGE”: MEDIATION AGREEMENT DID NOT OVERRIDE GENERAL PRINCIPLES PREVENTING WITHOUT PREJUDICE COMMUNICATION BEING USED A A FORM OF BLACKMAIL
The decision of Mrs Justice Rose in Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd v Ferster & Ors [2015] EWHC 3895 (Ch) considers the issue of “mediation privilege”. This is not a new case (the judgment was dated 21st December 2015) however it has…
NOT ALL WITNESS STATEMENTS SHOULD BE MADE PUBLIC AHEAD OF A TRIAL: THE TIMES HAS TO WAIT
In Blue -v- Ashley & The Times Newspapers Limited [2017] EWHC 1553 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt considered whether a witness statement should be disclosed to the public when it had been referred to at a pre-trial hearing. The application was…
SETTING ASIDE DISCONTINUANCE AND DISAPPLYING QOCS: A HIGH COURT DECISION
In Shaw -v- Medtronic [2017] EWHC 1397 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender considered issues relating to the setting aside of notices of discontinuance and disapplying QOCS. He declined to set aside a notice of discontinuance or give permission to enforce costs…
“THE DOG ATE MY COURTWORK”: REASONS, EXCUSES AND EXPLANATIONS IN APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS
One thing that the the Denton decision did, without doubt*, was to put an end to the “mandatory” requirement for a “good reason” to explain a breach when applying for relief from sanctions. However it is always incumbent upon…
A NUMBER OF CHALLENGES TO THE ENFORCEABILITY OF A DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENT: MASTER MAKES ORDER FOR A SPLIT TRIAL
In Lexlaw Ltd -v- Zuberi [2017] EWHC 1350 (Ch) Master Clark considered challenges to the validity of a damages based agreement between solicitor and client. It was decided that the question of the enforceability of the agreement should be tried…
SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE AFTER REDBOURN: 10 KEY POINTS FOR DEFENDANTS (CLAIMANTS MUST READ TOO)
The judgment in Redbourn Group Ltd -v- Fairgate Development Limited [2017] EWHC 1223 (TCC) highlights the fact that there is a new age for a party seeking to set judgment aside. Not only does the party have to satisfy the requirements of…
SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT, DELAY AND DENTON: “PROMPTNESS” CONSIDERED: DELAY MUST BE EXPLAINED
In Redbourn Group Ltd -v- Fairgate Development Limited [2017] EWHC 1223 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson refused to set aside a default judgment. The case contains some important discussion on how the Denton principles apply to applications to set aside judgment. “……
LATE SERVICE OF APPLICATIONS, INACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES AND THE PRESUMPTIONS THE JUDGE SHOULD DRAW
In Capita PLC -v- Darch [2017] EWHC 1248 (Ch) Richard Spearman QC highlighted some of the procedural issues that can arise when applications are served late and with insufficient time estimates. A failure to serve promptly did not, ultimately,…
AMENDMENT, PLEADINGS, NEARLY OPPRESSIVE CONDUCT AND PROLIX WITNESS STATEMENTS: MASTER ISSUES AN EARLY WARNING
In Williers -v Joyce [2017] EWHC 1225 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh issued a number of warnings in relation to procedural issues. Amendment, conduct, pleadings, disclosure and witness statements are considered. (The judgment also contains a full copy of the re-amended…
DUTY OF FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: APPLIES TO APPLICATIONS MADE ON SHORT NOTICE
The “new year resolution” I recommended for litigators this year was to be very careful when making without notice applications. A failure to make full and frank disclosure has proven to be financially and professionally disastrous for some litigants (and…
DELAY, DENTON, APPEALS AND CROSS-APPEALS: EXTENSION OF TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED
In Pinisetty -v-Manikonda [2017] EWHC 838 (QB) Mr Justice Langstaff considered an issue relating to an appeal (and cross-appeal) being out of time. Although the judgment on this issue is largely academic (the appeal failed in any event), it contains…
KNOW (AND FOLLOW) THE RULES – OR ELSE: DPP COPS IT.
There is some irony in the decision of Mr Justice Fraser in R (RA) -v- The Director of Public Prosecutions [2017] EWHC 714 (Admin). The claimant, a litigant in person, complied with the rules. The defendant, a specialised government department…
JUDGMENTS CANNOT EASILY BE RE-OPENED: NOR IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE PRIVILEGE EASILY WAIVED
In Gillian -v- HEC Enterprises Ltd [2017] EWHC 461 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan considered an application to reconsider and re-open an earlier judgment, The judgment contains interesting observations about attempts to “reopen” court decisions, the use and alleged waiver of “without…
IF YOU DECIDE NOT TO TURN UP FOR COURT DON’T EXPECT MUCH SYMPATHY: COUNCIL TOLD TO GET ON ITS BIKE
The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Camden Borough Council -v- Humphreys [2017] EWCA Civ 24 illustrates the danger of a party deciding not to attend a hearing. THE CASE A recipient of a parking ticket, Mr Humphreys, had…
You must be logged in to post a comment.