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…