THE DIFFICULT ISSUE OF THE CHILD CLAIMANT AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 14th OCTOBER 2024
For many years now I have been researching and writing about the particular problems that face practitioners when they are dealing with a claim by a child who could suffer loss of earnings in the future as a result of…
EXPERTS CAN BE ASKED TO GIVE AN OPINION ON MATTERS OF FACT, EVEN WHEN THOSE FACTS ARE ULTIMATELY FOR THE COURT
There is a short passage in the judgment of Master Davison in The Owners of the “Christos Theo” v The Owners of the “Aliki” [2024] EWHC 2106 (Admlty) which deals with an issue rarely considered by the courts – how…
PROVING THINGS 245: A FAILURE TO PROVE A LOSS OF EARNINGS: A CLAIM PUT AT OVER £2 MILLION AND £23,000 AWARDED
In McInerney v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (Victimisation) [2024] EAT 158 HHJ James Tayler (in the Employment Appeal Tribunal) dismissed the claimant’s appeal in relation to loss of earnings. The Employment Tribunal had found that the claimant had failed…
SOLICITORS, SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE DUTY TO THE COURT: THREE CASES REVIEWED
The judgment in Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports & Anor (Re Wasted Costs Order) [2024] EWHC 2415 (KB) we looked at last week contained some important observations about the limit of a solicitor’s duty to check their own client’s social media…
SPECIAL MEASURES IN A CIVIL CASE: AN EXAMPLE OF HOW IT WORKS
Taking special measures to protect witnesses is a well known feature in the family and criminal courts. They are less well known in the civil courts. An example can be seen in the judgment of Deputy Master Marzec in IMX…
AN EXPERT SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED HIS INITIAL ASSESSMENT TO BE “CORRUPTED” BY INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE: “THERE SHOULD BE SOME INTROSPECTION ON THE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT LEGAL DEPARTMENT ABOUT THIS”
We are returning once again to the judgment of HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB).We are also returning to the question of expert evidence. There…
BACK TO THE CASE OF WILSON: THIS TIME THE “CHERRY PICKING” EXPERT WHO VEERED INTO A PARTISAN APPROACH
We are returning to the judgment of HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB) and staying with the theme of expert witnesses whose evidence was found wanting. (This…
WHEN AN EXPERT HAS “LOST ALL INDEPENDENCE AND OBJECTIVITY” – AND ADMITS SO IN COURT
There are many interesting aspects of the judgment of HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB). Here I want to concentrate upon the judgment relating to…
AN “UNRELIABLE” SCHEDULE LEADS TO A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS BEING STRUCK OUT (AND FOUR WEBINARS ON LOSS OF EARNINGS)
The way in which a claim for loss of earnings claim is presented is of crucial importance in most claims for damages. There are a series of four seminars below where many of the essential elements are considered. A case…
DON’T DISCLOSE COUNSEL’S ADVICE TO THE OTHER SIDE: A REPEAT IN RELATION TO AN ISSUE THAT IS STILL HAPPENING
An issue I have seen periodically came up on LinkedIn yesterday. A defendant was complaining that there was a lack of co-operation by the claimant’s solicitor in failing to show them counsel’s Advice in relation to a claim brought by…
WITNESS CREDIBILITY AND REWRITING EVENTS OVER TIME: DEFENDANT DRIVER CAST AROUND FOR AN INTERPRETATION OF THEIR ACTIONS THAT PLACED THEM IN THE BEST LIGHT POSSIBLE
We have looked recently at a number of cases in relation to witness credibility. The judgment of HHJ Martin Picton in Palmer v Timms [2024] EWHC 2292 (KB) is a case where the primary issue at trial was the credibility…
PREPARING TRIAL AND APPLICATION BUNDLES: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE: WEBINAR 4th DECEMBER 2024
The previous post on Serra -v- Harvey [2024] EWHC 2250 (KB) has led to me finalising a (long-prepared) webinar on bundles. In Serra wasted costs were ordered on an indemnity basis against the claimant’s solicitors because the lateness and condition of the trial bundles. The bundles…
LATE AND “HAPHAZARD” SERVICE OF TRIAL BUNDLES LEADS TO WASTED COSTS ORDER AGAINST CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS (ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS)
There are numerous cases on this blog about trial bundles. The issues never seem to end and have not been solved by the advent of the electronic bundle. This can be seen in the judgment of Deputy High Court Judge…
PROVING THINGS 242: THE CLAIMANT WHO WAS GIVEN A SECOND CHANCE TO PROVE HIS DAMAGES CLAIM
We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Allard v Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd [2024] EWHC 2227 (KB). This was looked at earlier in relation to the trial judge’s observations about the wholly inadequate counter-schedule. However…
WHEN A PARTY IS BANKRUPT: WEBINAR ON THE 16th SEPTEMBER 2024: AN IMPORTANT TOPIC THAT MAY HELP FLOAT YOUR BOAT
In The Mayor And Burgesses of the London Borough of Richmond v Trotman [2024] EWHC 2145 (KB) Mr Justice Kerr was critical of the claimant’s failure to consider the consequences of the defendant being bankrupt. Insolvency issues in litigation…
THE COUNCIL MUST PAY THE COSTS OF ITS EXPERT’S CHANGE OF MIND: THE DUTY TO TEST THE STRENGTH OF THE CASE WITH AN EXPERT CONSIDERED
There is an interesting consideration of the duties relating to the interplay between lawyer and expert in the judgment of Fordham J in Halton Borough Council, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and…
“IT IS ENTIRELY OUTSIDE THE REMIT OF AN EXPERT TO DECIDE WHICH WITNESSES OF FACT HE BELIEVES OR DISBELIEVES”: DEFENDANT’S WITNESS DOES NOT FARE WELL
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Allard v Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd [2024] EWHC 2227 (KB). More accurately to the first instance decision which the defendant attempted (unsuccessfully) to appeal. This time in relation to…
MAKING APPLICATIONS TO THE COURT: A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE: WEBINAR 10th SEPTEMBER 2024
It is surprising how many applications are made which do not comply with the most basic requirements of procedure and evidence. This webinar on the 10th September 2024 aims to help practitioners avoid errors and aims to ensure that participants…
A TRIAL BUNDLE THAT WAS A “CHAOTIC MESS”; NON COMPLIANT WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT REPORTS AND “PROCEDURAL TRENCH WARFARE”
There are interesting procedural aspects in the judgment of Simon Gleeson in Carl v Hawkins & Ors [2024] EWHC 2186 (Ch). The case, about historic sports cars, involved (among other things) “procedural trench warfare”; highly defective bundles; non-compliant witness statements;…
VALUATION EXPERTS SHOULD SHOW THEIR CALCULATIONS: ESTIMATING A VALUE AND WORKING BACKWARDS TO JUSTIFY THAT DOES NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE COURT
In Sahota v Sahota & Ors [2024] EWHC 2165 (Ch) HHJ Rawlings (sitting as a High Court Judge)was critical of an expert witness who, in essence, worked backwards in relation to a valuation. The judge found that having come to…