CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 106: WHEN IS VAT ON LEGAL COSTS RECOVERABLE FROM THE OTHER SIDE ON ASSESSMENT?
Yesterday we looked at a case where a receiving party accidentally included a claim for VAT in a bill of costs. The error was noted, after being queried by the judge, however the judge went on to state ” I…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 104: YOU CAN’T ACT ON BEHALF OF BOTH SIDES IN LITIGATION – YOU REALLY CAN’T
How does one firm act on behalf of both sides in litigation? Entering judgment for a claimant and then applying, on behalf of the defendant, to have that judgment set aside? The easy answer is that it can’t. This…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 100: WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A REMINDER OF THE KEY POINTS IN GESTMIN
Now that we have reached 100 it is a good time to revisit the basic issue of how the court assesses witness credibility. We are therefore looking at the basic guidance given in Gestmin SGPS SA v Credit Suisse (UK) Limited…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 97: GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: 10 BASIC POINTS
This is not the first time that this series has dealt with this issue. The post earlier this week on the judgment in MF Tel Sarl v Visa Europe Ltd [2023] EWHC 1336 (Ch) shows that it is a regular issue….
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 93: THE TIME FOR SERVING AN APPLICATION AFTER IT HAS BEEN MADE
The previous post about the judgment in AMRA Leasing Ltd v DAC Aviation (EA) Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1718 (Comm) involved a case where the defendants had waited for two months to serve an application. This was not a critical…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 92: RESILING FROM ADMISSIONS – A SUMMARY OF THE LAW
The judgment of Master Stevens in Shah v London Borough of Barnet [2021] EWHC 2631 (QB) provides an essential summary of the rules and case law in relation to resiling from admissions. The decision itself was looked at in an…
“A SOLICITOR, NO MATTER HOW EXPERIENCED OR INEXPERIENCED, MUST BE TAKEN TO KNOW THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES “(ii): A REMINDER OF THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES
The post yesterday on the case where it was stated that every lawyer is taken to know the Civil Procedure Rules has led to me re-visit the “Back to Basics” series on this blog. The series now has 91 posts*…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 90: APPEALS, RESPONDENT’S NOTICES AND DENTON
The Court of Appeal judgment in Unite the Union v Alec McfAdden [2021] EWCA Civ 199 highlights the needs for a party, responding to an appeal, to file a Respondent’s Notice if it wants to argue there are additional, or…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 86: PRE-ACTION ADMISSIONS: THE DANGERS OF NOT MAKING THEM AND THE CONSEQUENCES IF YOU DO
The judgment in Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service v Veevers [2020] EWHC 2550 (Comm) HHJ Pearce emphasises the point that a party can make a formal pre-action admission. A party who tries an alternative “non-formal” admission may well not get…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 85: DIRECTIONS AND COURT ORDERS SHOULD BE “REALISTIC AND ACHIEVABLE”
One aspect of the Denton decision that is often overlooked, but which was very welcome, was the Court of Appeal’s message to the courts (and the parties) that any directions given should be “realistic and achievable.” WHAT WAS SAID…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 84: HOW NOT TO MAKE A PART 36 OFFER THAT IS NOT VALID:
You may not care to believe it but the title of this post is deliberate, there is a double negative and a lack of clarity. This reflects the ambiguities and uncertainties in many of the attempts at Part 36 offers…
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…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 66: THE COURT HAS TO KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4
A party seeking to rely on expert evidence requires permission from the court. It is surprising how often the rule requiring the court to be provided with details of the cost of that expert is overlooked. “When parties apply for…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 65: THAT NIGHTMARE SCENARIO WHERE THE COURT HAS ISSUED THE CLAIM FORM BUT YOU CAN’T SERVE IT
Here I want to isolate one aspect of the judgment in AAA -v- Rakoff [2019] EWHC 2525 (QB) that was easy to miss amidst all the features of that case. The fact that the court can issue proceedings and hold onto…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 64: THE AUTOMATIC STAY (EASY TO FORGET ABOUT)
Here we look at the automatic stay imposed by CPR 15.11. This is one of those rules than can be overlooked and could, if ignored, cause major procedural difficulties. THE RULES “Where – (a) at least 6 months have expired…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 63: WHEN WILL THE COURT REDUCE THE NUMBER OF WITNESSES ALLOWED?
Here we are looking at CPR 32.2 (3) which gives the court express powers to identify or limit the number of witnesses a party may call. That power has now been considered several times by the courts. Firstly by Mr…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 62: ASKING LEADING QUESTIONS WHEN INTERVIEWING WITNESSES – CAN (OR WILL) LEAD TO PROBLEMS
Examination in chief is rare in civil cases, many (perhaps most) practitioners will never have seen it done in court. There is a rule against asking leading questions when taking a witness through their evidence. There is a good reason…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 58: HOW TO CALCULATE TIME IN THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES
The previous post on the errors made in relation to calculation of time highlight the need for practitioners to be aware of the precise rules in relation to calculation of time. In this respect this may be the easiest post…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 57: YOU CAN’T SUBMIT THAT A WITNESS IS LYING UNLESS YOU HAVE PUT THAT CASE TO THEM
A short, but fundamental, point about making submissions at the close of a case. You cannot generally make submissions that a witness is lying unless that case has been put directly to that witness in cross-examination. “It is a fundamental…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 56: ADVISING ON THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”
The difficulties facing those giving advice about litigation is summed up in a judgment of Sedley LJ “Clients, I know, want two inconsistent things. They want confident advice on which they can act, and they want cautionary advice about the…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 55: THE 70 KEY POINTS OF THE DENTON JUDGMENT
The judgment in Denton -v- White [2014] EWCA Civ 906 was given five years ago. It is a case that is still cited daily in the courts. It can be misunderstood or misquoted. Here are the 70 key points of this…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 54: SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES SHOULD NOT BE WORKS OF FICTION
Anyone drafting anything in the litigation process must remain acutely aware that there is real possibility that the document they are drafting will one day be read by a judge. This is even more likely in relation to a schedule…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 52: THE REPLY AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: TO REPLY OR NOT TO REPLY – THAT IS THE QUESTION
Here we take a quick look at the rules and practice directions in relation to filing a Reply and Defence to a Counterclaim. In particular claimants should be very aware of the fact that a defendant can apply to enter…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 46: HOW TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL: HINTS AND TIPS FROM THE INTERNET
There is an ongoing debate going on on Twitter at the moment about “how to instruct counsel”. More particularly the problems caused by “instructions” being sent in a chain of emails (or other electronic communication) with major difficulties in finding…
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…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 39: A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS: THE RULES AND CASE LAW
In a discussion about the 20th anniversary of the Civil Procedure Rules on Twitter today someone asked if “Notices to Admit Facts” were still available, they had not seen one for a long time. The rules still permit parties to…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 38: THE DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM
The previous post was about the “reply”. The rules relating to a Defence to Counterclaim are different. Very importantly the timing of the defence to counterclaim is different. There is an obligation on a claimant to properly and fully plead…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 36A: UNDERSTANDING “LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING”
In assessing a case, and the evidence of both sides, litigators have to be aware of the process of “litigation wishful thinking”. Witnesses may be perfectly honest, but their memories as to what happened are influenced by what they wish would have…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 36 : WHAT TO DO WHEN A PROPOSED DEFENDANT HAS DIED AND THERE IS NO GRANT OF PROBATE
A search term that arrived on this blog earlier today asked “how to you sue a dead person?” The basic answer is that you can’t. You have to sue their executors or administrators. The problem arises when probate has not…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 35: WITNESS CREDIBILITY: MORE THAN MEMORY OR HONESTY
The question of witness credibility is often the central issue of most cases that get to trial. Surprisingly it is a matter that barely features in legal education. A knowledge of the factors that a judge will take into account…
CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 24: THE BANKRUPT CLAIMANT (PERSONAL INJURY LITIGANTS IN PARTICULAR)
I am writing this primarily because of a conversation I had with a law graduate who thought the term “bankruptcy” was a generic term to cover anyone who was hard up. The very basic point about what bankruptcy is, and…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 22: WHEN THE CLAIMANT ADOPTS ALLEGATIONS OF CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: HOIST ON YOUR OWN PETARD
This post follows on from the previous post in relation to pleading the Defendant’s case in the alternative. Here we are looking at cases where a defendant pleads allegations of negligence and the claimant uses those allegations as allegations against the…
CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 21: PLEADING IN THE ALTERNATIVE: BINKS -v- SECURICOR
Can a claimant plead two alternative cases? This is an issue that often arises in personal injury litigation, where the basic facts are disputed. A claimant may wish to argue that the defendant remains liable – even on the defendant’s…
BACK TO BASICS 14: SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ON A SOLICITOR
In the case I wrote about yesterday, Higgins & Ors v TLT LLP [2017] EWHC 3868 (Ch), the very basic errors made by the claimant’s solicitor in relation to service of the claim form were held to amount to “misconduct” (albeit in…
BACK TO BASICS 19: COSTS BUDGETING WHEN CASE IS MORE THAN £25,000 BUT LESS THAN £50,000
There are special rules governing budgets in cases where the claimant claims more than £25,000 but less than £50,000. Firstly the budget has to be filed much earlier. Secondly the budget “must” only be the first page of Precedent H….
BACK TO BASICS 17: WHEN SHOULD A COST BUDGET BE FILED: WHERE THINGS GO WRONG
This may appear very basic. However I have seen both sides falling foul of this very recently. In particular the fact that the budget has to be filed with the directions questionnaire when the claim is limited to £50,000. THE…
BACK TO BASICS 16: COSTS BUDGETING: THE GUIDANCE NOTES ON PRECEDENT H
There is much written about the process of costs budgeting. There is much to be said, when preparing for a hearing – and often at the hearing itself, looking at the Practice Direction and Guidance Notes. THE PRACTICE DIRECTION The…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 13: WHAT IS MEANT BY WITNESS “CREDIBILITY”? WHY THIS IS OFTEN CENTRAL TO A LITIGATOR’S WORK
Many civil cases turn on witness credibility, yet very little training and education is given to lawyers about assessing credibility. Every litigator has to be able to make an assessment of this when taking a case on; before issuing proceedings…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 12: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NON-ADMISSION AND A DENIAL
Some defences adopt a scattergun approach of “denying” everything. Some are more selective – they “put the Claimant to strict proof”. Many defences ignore the important distinction between a non-admission and a denial. THE DIFFERENCE IN A NUTSHELL If you…
CIVIL PROCEDURE:BACK TO BASICS 9: THE COURT NOT ENTITLED TO REJECT WRITTEN EVIDENCE UNLESS IT IS “SIMPLY INCREDIBLE”
There is a short passage in Wards Solicitors v Hendawi [2018] EWHC 1907 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a judge of the High Court), that serves as a reminder of a basic principle in interlocutory proceedings – a court will not…
CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 8: LEAVING VENOM OUT OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: A PEN DIPPED IN VITRIOL IS GOING TO COST YOU MONEY
It is surprising how many witness statements I have read (both in practice and in the reports) that contain invective material. Litigants appear to think it important, and effective, that they disparage their opponents. Litigants should be warned that this…
CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 6: NON-DISCLOSURE OF A PART 36 OFFER
This post is caused by some comments on Twitter this evening. A surprising number of cases where parties have, by one method or other, disclosed a Part 36 offer. This has been done by including the offers in the trial…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 5: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES: NOT A NUMBER-CRUNCHING EXERCISE
If there is anything that suffers from being taken for granted it is the basic schedule and counter-schedule. This is demonstrated in the judgment available today in Wright v Satellite Information Services Ltd [2018] EWHC 812 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip. The appeal…
CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 4: WHAT NOT TO PUT IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: “INADMISSIBLE AND IRRELEVANT OPINION, SUBMISSION, SPECULATION AND INNUENDO”
This is a very basic point. A witness statement should consist of evidence. That principle is often breached in interlocutory applications, as we have seen. However when a lawyer does this, or allows it to happen, in a witness statement…
CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 3: THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH
The aim of this series is to look at things that litigators do every day – almost automatically. Signing a statement of truth is one of those things. This is a regular occurrence in many solicitor’s offices. It is a…
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…
You must be logged in to post a comment.