SOLICITOR AND CLIENT COSTS: A PRACTICAL GUIDE – BOOK REVIEW: BUY IT AND READ IT: £30 WORTH SPENDING
Disputes about costs between lawyers and their (former) clients can be “challenging”. Indeed they can be vitriolic and expensive. The lawyer thinking “We’ve done the work” – the client thinking “how much” and “I got nothing out of it, why…
WHEN IS A REPORT NOT A MEDICAL REPORT? RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A “MEDICAL REPORT” WITH THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
In a judgment given today at Leeds County Court His Honour Judge Gosnell held that a claimant, seeking damages for industrial deafness, breached the rules when issuing by not serving a medical report but serving an “AMR” report. The judge,…
FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 7: THE “BACK TO BASICS” SERIES
I am looking back at the posts that have been part of a series over the past five years. The “Back to Basics” posts are part of a series that is very much ongoing. The aim of each post is…
WHEN LESSONS ARE NOT LEARNT: “IDENTICAL WITNESS STATEMENTS” : COPY AND PASTE FUNCTION OF A WORD PROCESSOR WILL NOT IMPRESS A JUDGE
It is worth looking in more detail at the the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Merit Merrell Technology Ltd [2018] EWHC 1577 (TCC). In particular on witness statements. The judgment sets out some important lessons (it…
THE IMPORTANCE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION
This post is caused by a search term that arrived on this blog today “Is an application for an extension of time an application for relief from sanctions?”. The short answer to that is – it depends. An application made after…
STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE? WELL YOU MAY NOT BE: COURT ORDERS THAT MAY NOT COMPLY WITH COURT RULES
When the rules committee re-introduced the concept of “automatic striking out” into the rules it was always going to cause problems. A case can be automatically struck out for failure to pay the trial fee in time. However some Court…
CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 7: BUNDLES: A CHANCE TO REVISIT “SEDLEY’S LAWS”
If there is a league for blogs with the most number of posts about bundles then Civil Litigation Brief may well be in the top 10 (sadly I suspect even in the top place). There is a reason for this….
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “KNOWLEDGE” AND “BELIEF”? A CASE AND A REVIEW OF 10 KEY POINTS
This blog has looked, many times, at the importance of giving the source of information and belief when a party (and particularly when a legal representative) makes a witness statement. It is sometimes possible for you opponent to attempt to…
JUDICIALLY REVIEWING THE COUNTY COURT: PROCEDURAL CONFUSION, UNPLEADED POINTS AND THE HIGH STANDARD TO BE MET WHEN ATTEMPTING TO JUDICIALLY REVIEW A COUNTY COURT DECISION
There are many matters of interest in the short judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Watkins, R (On the Application Of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne County Court [2018] EWHC 1029, a rare example of a party trying to judicially review a…
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…
LEAVE TO APPEAL, APPEAL NOTICES AND THE NEED TO APPLY TO AMEND: COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS CRUCIAL: KNOW THE RULES
In Hickey v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2018] EWCA Civ 851 the Court of Appeal set out, in categorical terms, that parties should comply with the provisions relating to permission to appeal. In particular a party cannot…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM AT THE “OLD ADDRESS”: THE HIERARCHY OF MEASURES A CLAIMANT HAS TO TAKE
A search term arrived on this blog today “Service of claim form at old address”. This is an interesting issue to look at following the earlier posts on service. In particular the hierarchy of measures a claimant is required to…
SERVICE OF A COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT: MURPHY -V- STAPLES RE-VISITED
I am likely to be returning to the judgment of Master Bowles in Woodward & Anor v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd [2018] EWHC 334 (Ch) several times on this blog. If the decision is appealed and upheld it is likely to…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS : A CLASSIC CASE FOR RELIEF TO BE GRANTED: NOTICE TO PROVE SERVED LATE
In Tuke v JD Classics Ltd [2018] EWHC 531 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles granted a claimant relief from sanctions when a “Notice to Prove” was served late. It is a reminder, amongst other things, of the need to serve a…
LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF FUNDING AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE CLAIMANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In the judgment today in Springer v University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 436 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that refused to give relief from sanctions following late service of notice of funding. The case shows…
INTERPLEADER PROCEEDINGS: FILLING THE GAP IN THE RULES
In Celador Radio Ltd v Rancho Steak House Ltd (Equitable Interpleader – Enforcement) [2018] EWHC 219 (QB) Master McCloud had to look back at a few centuries of jurisprudence in order to find a solution to a very modern problem. What…
A “PART 36 OFFER” THAT ATTEMPTS TO VARY USUAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES IS NOT A PART 36 OFFER AT ALL: HIGH COURT DECISION
In James v James & Ors [2018] EWHC 242 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) determined an interesting issue in relation to an offer made in the course of proceedings. A “Part 36” offer which attempted to…
INAPPROPRIATE USE OF PART 8 PROCEDURE: “AN ENTIRELY UNSATISFACTORY WAY TO PROCEED”: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Victory House General Partner Ltd v RGB P&C Ltd [2018] EWHC 102 (TCC) Miss Joanna Smith QC (sitting as a Deputy) was clear in her view that a claimant had used the Part 8 procedure inappropriately. “In my judgment this…
THE PERILOUS STRATEGY OF SERVING EVIDENCE LATE: DENTON APPLIES: A RELEVANT FACTOR IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION
The case of Crown House Technologies Ltd v Cardiff Commissioning Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 54 (TCC) highlights the dangers of waiting to serve evidence until the last moment. If it is served late then a party requires permission of the…
WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON’T COMPLY WITH THE RULES: 10 REASONS WHY THE GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT: LITIGATION REQUIRES EVIDENCE NOT GOSSIP
There is a brief report on Lawtel that highlights the need for compliance with the rules relating to witness statements. The issue of failing to give sources of information and belief has been dealt with several times on this blog….
DENTON APPLIED WHEN THE OTHER SIDE DOES NOT SHOW UP FOR TRIAL
In Foreman v Williams [2017] EWHC 3370 (QB) Peter Marquand (sitting as a High Court judge) considered the application of the Denton principles in an unusual context. The claimant required relief from sanctions because he was unable to serve documents on…
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…
COUNTY COURT HAS POWER TO SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL – IF IT WAS OBTAINED BY FRAUD
The decision in Salekipour & Anor v Parmar [2017] EWCA Civ 2141 was made after three previous hearings a (including two appeal hearings) in the lower courts. It was the only time the claimants were successful. It involved an important procedural…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT ISSUES IN BREACH OF CIVIL RESTRAINT ORDER
In Couper v Irwin Mitchell LLP & Ors [2017] EWHC 3231 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold refused the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions when the claimant had issued proceedings in breach of a civil restraint order. The claimant, however, was given…
ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS DEPLOYED IN COURT: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION
The judgment of Master McCloud in Dring v Cape Distribution Ltd & Anor (Constitution – access to courts – open justice) [2017] EWHC 3154 (QB) considers the issue of whether the public should have access to documents disclosed during the course…
BE WARY OF THE AUTOMATIC STAY – IF YOU SERVE AND DO NOTHING
CPR 15,11(2) provides for an automatic stay. The judgment in Citicorp Trustee Company Ltd & Anor v Al-Sanea & Anor [2017] EWHC 2845 (Comm) shows that it is normally not difficult to lift that stay. The key point is to know…
MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 3: THE DATE OF ISSUE FOR LIMITATION IS THE DATE ON THE CLAIM FORM
Once or twice a month I receive a phone call from practitioners in a panic. They sent the claim form to court in good time but the date of issue is outside the limitation period. Further some defendants still take…
COST BUDGET SERVED TWO MONTHS LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED: DELAY DOES NOT ALWAYS GIVE RISE TO A SIGNIFICANT BREACH
I am grateful to my colleague Colin Richmond for sending me a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Gosnell In Hewitt -v- Smith (Bradford County Court 16th June 2017) relating to a successful appeal from a refusal to…
LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DETAILS OF CLAIM DO NOT CONSTITUTE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
In Chelsea Bridge Apartments Ltd -v- Old Street Homes Ltd (Deputy Master Cousins, 4th September 2017*) Deputy Master Cousins refused the claimants’ application for relief from sanctions in failing to serve Particulars of claim on time. “I find that the…
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…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS FOLLOWING BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER: APPLICATION REFUSED: A WORKING HOLIDAY IS NO EXCUSE
In The Financial Conduct Authority v Da Vinci Invest Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 2220 (Ch) Mr Justice Snowden rejected a defendant’s application for relief from sanctions for breach of a peremptory order. It is unusual in that the court considered…
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…
“MUST” MEANS “MUST”: WHEN CRUCIAL PARTS OF YOUR EVIDENCE AMOUNTS TO NO MORE THAN GOSSIP AND RUMOUR IT CAN BE COSTLY.
I have already written that there are many reasons litigators should read the judgment of Lady Justice Thirwall in Marsh -v- Ministry of Justice [2017] EWHC 1040 (QB) (the subsequent judgment on costs is also worth reading and will be covered soon)….
WHEN CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE AFTER A BUDGET IS CONFINED TO COURT FEES: DECISION TO ALTER BUDGET UPHELD
In Asghar -v- Bhatti[ 2017] EWHC 1702 (QB) Mr Justice Lewis considered an issue in relation to varying a budget that was confined to court fees. The court considered “change of circumstances” – this is also a case that shows…
WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES WHEN ITS DEFENCE IS STRUCK OUT? NOTHING
What is the position of a defendant whose action has been struck out? This was the question considered by Mr Justice Soole in Michael -v- Phillips [2017] EWHC 1984 (QB). The short answer is the defendant cannot dispute any aspect…
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…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED TO DEFENDANT WHO APPEARED BY COUNSEL: A “SURPRISING STATE OF AFFAIRS” PUT RIGHT
There may well be a term for the process by which a number of decisions, which appeared sensible at the time they were made, lead to a ridiculous result. This principle may well apply to what happened in Falmouth House…
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…
FILE A SKELETON ARGUMENT – IT IS MANDATORY
Many of the posts about skeleton arguments on this blog have been about content (usually length), The surprising aspect of R -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 639 (Admin) is that both sides decided not to file…
EVIDENCE IN PART 8 APPLICATIONS: APPLY IN ADVANCE OR YOU WILL PROBABLY NOT BE ALLOWED TO CALL ANY
It is unusual to call evidence in Part 8 applications. This is made clear in the judgment of HH Walden-Smith in Wokingham Borough Council -v- Scott [2017] EWHC 294 (QB). A party failed to make an application to call oral…
AN ORDER UNDER THE ARBITRATION ACT IS NOT AN ORDER UNDER CPR 3.1(7)
The judgment of Popplewell J in H -v- L [2017] EWHC 137 (Comm) relates to an application to remove an arbitrator. Most of the judgment considers the principles relating to the independence of arbitrators. The judge also considered points…
EXPERTS AND THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE: DEFENDANT ALLOWED TO RELY ON EXPERT ALSO USED BY CLAIMANT
In Wheeldon Brothers Waste Limited -v- Millennium Insurance Company Limited [2017] EWHC 218 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson allowed the defendant to rely on an expert that had also been instructed by the claimant. The circumstances are unusual and the case needs…
THE DUTY ON EX PARTE APPLICATIONS: SOLICITOR INVOLVED NOT ALLOWED TO APPEAL TO THE COURT OF APPEAL AGAINST FINDINGS AGAINST HIM
I am returning to the question of the lawyer’s duty on without notice applications. In March 2015 we looked at the case of Boreh -v- Republic of Djibouti [2015] EWHC 769 (Comm) where Mr Justice Flaux made a clear and unequivocal…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED(AFTER THE TRIAL)
In the judgment today in Schenk -v- Cook [2017] EWHC 144 (QB) Mr Justice Green upheld an order refusing relief from sanctions. However the appeal was heard in unusual circumstances. The judge considered the application for relief from sanctions striking…
NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE: COSTS BUDGETING AND QADER RESULT CODIFIED
The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2017 were made on the 3rd February. Most of these come into force on the 6th April 2017. The new rules are available here COSTS BUDGETING The amendments set out below may be perplexing. However…
AMENDMENT TO ADD NEW ISSUES THAT HAVE ARISEN SINCE ISSUE: CONSIDER THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE AND NOT THE RSC
I said that there would be two posts about the judgment of Master Marsh in The Football Association Premier League Limited -v- O’Donovan [2017] EWHC 152 (Ch). The first looked at the lifting of the automatic stay. Here we look…
FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION ALLOWED EXTRA TIME: CPR 15.11 CONSIDERED: NOT AN ESPECIALLY HEAVY BURDEN
There are going to be two posts about the judgment of Master Marsh in The Football Association Premier League Limited -v- O’Donovan [2017] EWHC 152 (Ch). Here we look at the decision in relation to CPR 15.11. (The second post…
FIXED COSTS APPLY TO APPLICATIONS FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
The Court of Appeal judgment today in Sharp -v- Leeds City Council [2017] EWCA Civ 33 deals with an important point about fixed costs and applications for pre-action disclosure. KEY POINTS An application for pre-action disclosure made by a claimant…
COURT FEES AND STEALTH TAXES: REPAYMENT OF TRIAL FEES TO END NEXT YEAR
Thanks to Kerry Underwood for pointing out the provisions of The Civil Proceedings Fees (Amendment) Order 2016 which comes into force on the 6th March 2017. There is a hidden “tax” in that the repayment of court fees has ended….
You must be logged in to post a comment.