TODAY’S THE DAY: KEY POSTS AND ARTICLES ON FIXED COSTS
I suspect that this blog will be writing about fixed costs for some time to come. To mark (I won’t say “celebrate”) the start of the new regime I have done a round up previous posts, useful lectures and webinars…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 99: THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TOP RIGHT HAND CORNER OF A WITNESS STATEMENT AND AFFIDAVIT
The purpose of this series is to look at the most basic elements of civil procedure. One, very common, omission practitioners make is to fail to follow the mandatory requirements of Practice Direction 32 in relation to the information on…
PROVING THINGS 232: CAR FIRES AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: WHY EXPERTS SHOULD MIND THEIR LANGUAGE: A MOVE FROM “MUST” TO “MORE THAN PROBABLE” REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE
The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Nash v Volskwagen Financial Services (UK) Ltd [2023] EWHC 2326 (KB) contains important observations in relation to the law and evidence relating to causation. However I want to look at the judge’s consideration…
NEW COSTS RULES: WHEN A CASE CAN’T GO INTO THE INTERMEDIATE TRACK
Continuing with the series about the new rules relating to fixed costs. Here we recap on those cases that are not affected by the rules (because of the commencement date) and those issues that must be allocated to the multi-track….
NEW FIXED COSTS RULES: WHEN IS A CASE ALLOCATED TO THE INTERMEDIATE TRACK?
The new rules introduce the “intermediate track”. Here we look at the factors that lead to allocation to that track. From the 1st October 2023 we have a new CPR 26.9. The small claims track remains. The fast track is…
NEW FIXED COSTS RULES: THE NEW PART 28: CASE MANAGEMENT IN THE INTERMEDIATE TRACK: THE LENGTH OF WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT REPORTS
The new fixed costs provisions introduce the concept of the “Intermediate Track”. One point to note about this track is that there are specific rules about applying for directions. There are also very specific obligations in relation to the length…
PRACTICE DIRECTION CHANGES PUBLISHED YESTERDAY: CAME INTO FORCE 40 MINUTES AGO… CHANGES TO THE ONLINE CIVIL CLAIMS PILOT
The 159th update – Practice Direction Amendments was published yesterday and came into force at 11.00 today. (I am told that this is an improvement over some previous amendments which came into force before they were published). THE PRACTICE DIRECTION The update…
NEW RULES AS TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT: COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1st OCTOBER 2023: NEW CPR 24
“New” rules as to summary judgment come into force on the 1st October 2023. These are part of the process of “simplifying” the rules. The rules are introduced by the Civil Procedure (Amendment No.3) Rules 2023 THE NEW RULES “PART…
PART 36 APPLIES TO CLAIMS THAT ARE NOT ABOUT MONEY: SILENCE DID NOT INDICATE A REFUSAL TO ENTER ADR: PART 36 CONSEQUENCES APPLIED
In Jones v Tracey & Ors (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 2256 (Ch) Master Marsh (sitting in retirement) found that Part 36 applied to cases that were not about money. It was held that the fact that the action would be…
THE NEW RULES ON FIXED COSTS: TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS: THEY CANNOT AFFECT CURRENT CASES
I was at a social event on Friday night (but a blogger is never really off duty). During the course of the evening someone told me that they had had recently had a personal injury case where the judge, rather…
DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: “THE SCHEDULE WAS A FICTION … THE POINT WAS RECOGNISED ON BEHALF OF BOTH CLAIMANTS”: SELECTED QUOTES (AND A WEBINAR)
The the judgment of Costs Judge James in HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO) is one of a long series of cases where judges have been critical of the way in which schedules of damages have been…
THE COVER UP IS INVARIABLY WORSE THAN THE ERROR: WHAT TO DO WHEN MISTAKES ARE MADE
The post earlier this week based on the article by the Honourable Joseph Quinn led to to look in detail at one point made – that of avoiding a “cover up” and acting immediately to deal with mistakes. This led…
COST BITES 96: A “REPLACEMENT” BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED
In Henderson and Jones Ltd v Stargunter Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 1849 (TCC) Neil Moody KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered whether a formal application for relief from sanctions was needed in a case where a party…
JUST LET GO: COURTS CANNOT FORCE A LITIGATION FRIEND TO KEEP ON ACTING: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Major v Kirishana [2023] EWHC 1593 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter allowed an appeal in which a judge had refused a Litigation Friend’s application to terminate their appointment. The judgment makes it clear that there will be very few circumstances…
ANOTHER CLAIM FORM ISSUE: NO SEAL NO CASE: “SERVICE MEANS HAVING A SEALED CLAIM FORM IN HAND WHICH CAN BE PROVIDED TO THE DEFENDANT”
In Clewer v Higgs & Sons (a firm) [2023] EWHC 1556 (Ch) Mr Justice Adam Johnson upheld a decision that the claimants had failed to serve a claim form properly. The judge held that the requirement to serve a sealed…
CLAIMANTS COME TO GRIEF OVER SERVICE OF UNSEALED CLAIM FORM: COURT OF APPEAL HOLD THAT CPR 3.10 APPLIES TO DEFENDANT’S MISCARACTERISED APPLICATION
It is rarely possible to get to the end of a month without some kind of discussion on this blog about service of the claim form. This month is no exception. In Pitalia & Anor v NHS England [2023] EWCA…
ON THIS BLOG 10 YEARS AGO: PART 36; INTERIM PAYMENTS AND SUING THE “MAN OF STRAW”
Now that the blog is 10 years (and 2 days) old it gives me an opportunity to look back at previous posts in a way that remains useful. Some (but not all) of the posts over the past decade stand…
3,450 CLAIMANTS CAN USE THE SAME CLAIM FORM: DIVISIONAL COURT DECISION ON CPR 7.3.
I am grateful to David Platt KC for sending me a copy of the decision of the Divisional Court in Abbott -v- Ministry of Defence [2023] EWHC 1475 (KB). The Court overturned a previous decision of a Master and allowed…
PROVING THINGS 227: IF YOU ARE GOING TO ALLEGE THAT LAWYERS WERE NEGLIGENT IN NOT CALLING EVIDENCE THEN YOU REALLY SHOULD REALLY HAVE THAT EVIDENCE TO HAND
The decision in Murithi & Ors v AVH Legal LLP (t/a Tandem Law) & Ors [2023] EWHC 1245 (KB) has in some ways a profound irony. A case alleging negligence by lawyers for failing to call evidence itself failed because…
RULE CHANGES ON THE 1ST OCTOBER 2023: FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS AND ALL THAT: LOOKING AHEAD – A QUICK GLANCE AT THE PRIMARY SOURCES
The rules introducing the “Intermediate Track” for cases between £25,000 and £100,000 are now published, they come into force on the 1st October 2023. There are links to the source material below. A more detailed guide to the changes will…
APPEALS, BUNDLES AND “SPEAKING NOTES”: BUNDLES(INCLUDING PAGE NUMBERING) GO AWRY: A “SPEAKING NOTE” IS NOT TO BE USED AS A SUPPLEMENTARY SKELETON ARGUMENT
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Masih & Anor v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 1280 (KB) contains many matters of interest in relation to the conduct of the trial and appeal. Here we look at two aspects:…
THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO STRIKE OUT A PROPERLY PLEADED CLAIM IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: JUDGE’S SHOULD BE ASTUTE TO DEAL WITH APPLICATIONS TO STRIKE OUT WHICH ARE, IN REALITY, APPLICATIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The judgment of Mr Justice Choudhury in Kasongo v CRBE Ltd & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 557 demonstrates the danger when a defendant makes an application to strike out a statement of case. The judge allowed an appeal where a…
THE KING’S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (3): EMBARGOED JUDGMENTS – DON’T DISCLOSE EARLY TO ANYONE (LET ALONE THE LAWYER’S PR TEAM…)
The new guide has extended the section on embargoed judgments. This makes it absolutely clear that the disclosure of judgments to third parties (for example the lawyers’ PR teams) for the purpose of preparing a press release to publicise the…
COST BITES 83: DEFENDANT SERVING BUDGET LATE SCRAPES HOME IN A “BORDERLINE” CASE
In K/S Mountain Invest v Ducat Maritime Ltd [2023] EWHC 939 (Comm) HHJ Keyser KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) granted the defendant relief from sanctions following the late filing of its costs budget. The defendant was, perhaps, fortunate….
THE KING’S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (1): LAWYERS STAY OUT OF THE MEETING OF EXPERTS
A new edition of the King’s Bench Division Guide was published last week (although it is dated March 2023). I will take a short look at the major changes. Firstly looking at a new passage in relation to the instruction…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 96: PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE APPLICATION TO THE FIRST-INSTANCE JUDGE HAS TO BE MADE AT THE INITIAL HEARING (OR ADJOURNMENT THEREOF)
The judgment of HHJ Pelling in FG Financing Ltd & Anor v Lagun [2023] EWHC 126 (Comm) serves as a useful reminder of the limited period of time available to make an application to the first-instance judge for permission to…
“IT WAS TWENTY YEARS AGO TODAY”: A BATCH OF SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM CASES IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: A CHANCE TO REVIEW (OR REMINISCE..)
The Court of Appeal judgment in Cranfield & Anor v Bridgegrove Ltd. [2003] EWCA Civ 656 was given 20 years ago today. One of the aims of that judgment was to clarify issues relating to service of the claim form…
AMENDMENT, COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS AND THE DENTON CRITERIA: THERE IS NO HALFWAY HOUSE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
There are so many judgments dealing with the issue of late amendment that, as I have stated before, I often do not write about them – each being fact specific. However the Court of Appeal judgment in CNM Estates (Tolworth…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 95: ACCEPTING A PART 36 OFFER WHEN THERE IS MORE THAN ONE DEFENDANT
This post arises out of an interesting question I was asked in a recent webinar on Part 36.* The questioner asked wanted to accept a Part 36 offer by one defendant and continue the action against others. The situation here…
ANOTHER CHANGE IN THE RULES ON APRIL 6th: PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS CAN SAY GOODBYE (IN SOME CASES) TO THE ADMIRALTY COURT
The focus on the new rules on QOCS coming into force on the 6th April may lead to losing sight of some other changes. In particular the new rules and amendments to the Practice Direction in relation to accidents at…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS FROM APRIL 6th: OMNIBUS EDITION
The new rules on QOCS come into force on the 6th April. Here is a review of the key points as to issue, the consequences and links to useful commentary. WHEN THE RULES COME INTO FORCE The key date…
ISSUING IN HASTE BEFORE APRIL 6th: DO NOT REPENT AT LEISURE WITH SERVICE ISSUES IN FOUR MONTHS’ TIME
I have been told that there has been a flurry of activity this week with claimants anxious to issue proceedings before the change in the rules relating to QOCS. One problem with this is that there will now be numerous…
AGREEING EXTENSIONS OF TIME FOR SERVICE: THE ESSENTIAL POINT THAT THEY MUST BE IN WRITING
An interesting issue about “agreements” is referred to in the judgment of Mr Justice Kerr in Clarion Housing Association Ltd v Crest Nicholson Operations Ltd [2023] EWHC 620 (TCC). I will be looking at the case in more detail later. …
APRIL 5th IS AN IMPORTANT DATE: WHAT IS MEANT BY “ISSUED” IN THE CONTEXT OF CHANGES TO QOCS?
The new rules relating to the ability to set off defendant’s costs liabilities against a claimant’s costs and damages have, I am told, led to a rush to issue proceedings and a backlog in some courts. These rules come into…
A LITIGANT CAN “APPEAR” AT A SMALL CLAIMS TRACK HEARING BY THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Owen v Black Horse Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 325 the Court of Appeal allowed the claimant’s appeal. The claim had been struck out at the start of a Small Claims Track hearing on the grounds that attendance by the…
THE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS LATE: CLAIMANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: DEFENDANT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: EQUALITY IS NOT ALWAYS EQUITY
It is quite possible that both parties in an action could be in default. One party could be granted relief from sanctions for that default and the other refused. This is precisely what happened in Shill Properties Ltd v Bunch…
THE ABSENCE OF A REPLY TO A DEFENCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT COULD BE ASSUMED THAT THE ACCOUNT IN THE DEFENCE WAS ACCEPTED
There is a breach statement in the judgment of Lady Justice Andrews in Zanatta v Metroline Travel Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 224 that highlights a crucial point in relation to the drafting of a Reply. Whereas a Reply and Defence…
MISTAKES AND THE ROAD TRAFFIC PROTOCOL: DOCTRINE OF MISTAKE APPLIED: A WORKING EXAMPLE
In Doyle -v- the NFU (St Helens County Court 24th February 2023) Deputy District Judge Murray held that the doctrine of mistake applied to offers made on the Pre-Action Protocol for road traffic accidents. I am grateful to solicitor Jamil…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A DEFENCE TO A CLAIM “BASED AT LEAST IN PART ON WISHFUL THINKING”
In Litkraft Ltd v Cottrell [2023] EWHC 465 (Comm) HHJ Pearce (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered issues relating to credibility and weight in a case where there had been non-compliance with the rules relating to witness statements. We…
SERVICE ON A SOLICITOR WAS NOT DEFECTIVE: WHAT IS MEANT BY A “PLACE OF BUSINESS”?
In Ellison Road Ltd v Mian (t/a HKH Kenwright & Cox Solicitors) & Anor [2023] EWHC 375 (Ch) Master Brightwell rejected a defendant’s argument that he had not been properly served at his “place of business”. The case shows the…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS 3: WHAT INFORMED COMMENTATORS ARE SAYING: & TWO USEFUL WEBINARS
In the third in this series I thought it would be useful to highlight what informed commentators are saying in relation the new rules. I have gathered a range of views below. I have taken some key comments, however reading…
VULNERABLE WITNESSES IN THE CIVIL COURTS: THE VULNERABLE WITNESS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SHOWN CROSS EXAMINATION QUESTIONS IN ADVANCE:
There are relatively few cases relating to vulnerable witnesses in civil courts. In GKE v Gunning [2023] EWHC 332 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie considered the terms of an order made to protect a vulnerable witness. Although the wording of the…
“THE FOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE THE CAREFUL WORK OF A LEGAL TEAM”: JUDGE CRITICAL OF THE WAY STATEMENTS WERE PREPARED FOR TRIAL
There are many aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Mackenzie v Rosenblatt Solicitors & Anor [2023] EWHC 331 (Ch) that are of interest to litigators. However here we look at the judge’s criticisms of the witness statements…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED FOLLOWING LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: RECOURSE TO HUMAN RIGHTS ARGUMENTS WERE TO NO AVAIL
In Bank of Scotland Plc v Hoskins [2023] EWHC 306 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused an application for relief from sanctions following late service of witness evidence. The Defendant’s attempt to invoke Human Rights…
CLAIMANT SOUGHT TO AMEND NAME OF THE DEFENDANT: CLAIM STRUCK OUT: ANOTHER PERIL OF TRAVEL LITIGATION
I am grateful to barrister Katherine Howells for sending me a copy of the decision of Deputy District Judge Causton in Gregory -v- TUI Airways Ltd, a copy of that decision is available here Approved Judgment Gregory v TUI. …
DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: PRE-INQUEST ADMISSIONS FATAL TO DEFENDANT’S CASE
I am grateful to barrister Jo Moore for drawing my attention to the judgment of Master Sullivan in Somoye v North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 191 (KB). This is a case where the Master refused the defendant’s…
COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR RETROSPECTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE THE CLAIM FORM:CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS THAT CPR 3.9 APPLIED FAILED TO FLY
Regular readers may be concerned that we have got through to the second week of February of the year and we have not yet had a claims form case. (There are several in the pipeline.) I am grateful to barrister…
RESPONDENT SIX MONTHS LATE IN SERVING WITNESS STATEMENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED
In Davidson & Ors v Looney (Re Kieran Looney & Co Ltd) [2023] EWHC 197 (Ch) Deputy ICC Judge Kyriakides granted a respondent relief from sanctions when a witness statement was served six months late. THE CASE The applicant liquidators…
ANOTHER CASE OF DISCLOSURE OF AN EMBARGOED COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT: LIABILITY FOR CONTEMPT MAY BE STRICT, BUT IN THIS CASE NEED GO NO FURTHER
In Interdigital Technology Corporation & Ors v Lenovo Group Ltd & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 57 the Court of Appeal considered another case where the results a draft embargoed judgment was disclosed (although not the judgment itself). Liability for the…
COST BITES 51: CASE FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE FAST TRACK NOT SMALL CLAIMS TRACK: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL
In Wilkins v Serco Ltd [2023] EWHC 61 (KB) Mrs Justice Heather Williams rejected the defendant’s appeal in relation to allocation of a case for false imprisonment. She upheld a finding that the case would have been allocated to the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.