THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 54: ALTHOUGH THE PARTICULARS WOULD NOT BE STRUCK OUT SOME WORDS NEED TO BE CHANGED: CHOOSE YOUR WORDS WITH CARE…
We are returning to look at the case where the Master refused to strike out pleadings on the grounds that they were an abuse of process. However it was also made clear that the use of certain words in the…
WHEN PERMISSION IS (AND IS NOT) REQUIRED TO DISCONTINUE A CLAIM BROUGHT ON BEHALF OF MINORS: IT STILL HAS SERIOUS COSTS CONSEQUENCES THOUGH
Here we are looking at an interesting issue relating to discontinuance. In some circumstances a claim brought by a minor or protected party cannot be discontinued without the court’s permission; in other circumstances no permission is required. The distinction is…
THE CIVIL PROCEDURE (AMENDMENT) RULES 2026 (2): THE COURT CAN ORDER A PARTY TO REQUEST ANY PERSON TO PRODUCE DISCLOSURE AND INSPECTION
We are continuing with our look at the The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2026 which come into force on the 6th April 2026. Here we look at a totally new provision which gives the court power to order a party to…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE DRAFTING OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: “IT IS DIFFICULT TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN WHAT F SAYS AND WHAT AN ALGORITHM TELLS F TO SAY”
There is much material about witness evidence and witness statements on this site. In recent years we have also been discussing the use (and misuse) of artificial intelligence. We can be fairly sure that there will be much more about…
COST BITES 346: CONDUCT, “PART 36 OFFERS” AND THE STATUTORY PRESUMPTION ON A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: THE COSTS OF “ASSESSMENT” ARE DISTINCT TO THE COSTS OF “PROCEEDINGS”
In this judgment given yesterday a Costs Judge considered the relevance of conduct in a Solicitors Act assessment. In particular whether an offer expressed as a “Part 36 offer” by the claimant client could amount to “special circumstances” to displace…
DEFENDANTS GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE SERVED LATE: EVEN THOUGH THIS LED TO THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE TRIAL
A defendant that wishes to rely on surveillance evidence must choose its timing with extreme care. If the evidence is disclosed too early then the claimant could be “tipped off”; too late and this could be categorised as an “ambush”. …
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION(1): A PRIMER FOR “WHEN THE SKY IS FALLING”
Very little (if any) of the legal curriculum is devoted to what to do when things go wrong. Not enough (in my view) is devoted to preventing things go wrong. However here we concentrate on what do when something goes…
ANOTHER ISSUE ABOUT UNLESS ORDERS: CAN A COURT MAKE AN ORDER SPECIFYING A SUM FOR DAMAGES IF THE DEFENDANT DOES NOT COMPLY?
There have been a number of cases about unless orders recently. This one looks at the issue of whether the court can make an order and state that, if there is default, the claimant can enter judgment for a specific…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN YOU MUST AND WHEN YOU CAN’T SERVE THE CLAIM FORM ON A SOLICITOR: TRY TO AVOID TELLING THE COURT YOU ARE “SURPRISED” BY THE RULES…
The issue of when a claim form can be served on a defendant’s solicitor is one that has been considered many times on this site over the years. There can be two fatal errors for claimants. (1) Serving on a…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026
As regular readers of this site know procedural mistakes derail more civil claims than weak evidence or bad law. Missed deadlines, defective pleadings, non-compliance with court directions and costs failures can all result in serious sanctions — or the claim…
THE CLAIMANTS FILED A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: COURT REFUSES AN EXTENSION: SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE: OUT OF TIME MEANS OUT OF COURT…
One thing anyone considering an appeal should know, with absolute certainty, is the date the appeal has to be lodged. This, in turn, involves knowing the date on which the period starts running. Here we see a case where the…
THE PARTIES SHOULD DRAFT ORDERS IN THE TERMS STATED BY THE JUDGE: THE DRAFTING SHOULD NOT BE LITIGIOUS BUT TRANSACTIONAL
We are looking at two interesting aspects of a decision here. Firstly the judge’s observations on attempts by the claimants to “re-draw” the order made by the judge at the hearing. Secondly the finding that there were no good reasons…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY ii: WHY A JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THE EVIDENCE OF THE DEFENDANTS’ WITNESS: SOME REPLIES WERE “ESSENTIALLY MEANINGLESS VERBIAGE DESIGNED TO FOB OFF QUESTIONS” HE “PREFERRED NOT TO ANSWER”
Knowing the factors that lead to the evidence of a witness not being accepted is an important part of the litigator’s “skill set”. Here we look at a case where the evidence of a witness was roundly rejected. “I…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY i : COURT WOULD NOT DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES FROM WITNESSES WHO WERE NOT CALLED TO GIVE EVIDENCE “THE PERMISSIBLE FUNCTIONS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION DO NOT INCLUDE ENABLING THESE DEFENDANTS TO FISH FOR MATERIAL IN SUPPORT OF A CASE THAT IS (i) UNPLEADED (ii) IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CASE THAT IS PLEADED”
As you may guess from the title we are looking at witness evidence more than once today. Firstly we are going to look at an argument from the defendants that a claimant’s failure to call witnesses to give evidence meant…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED : WHEN NON-COMPLIANCE ALMOST APPEARS TO BE A LITIGATION STRATEGY: HAVING A BONA FIDE CLAIM DOES NOT GIVE YOU A FREE PASS
Here we have a case where the Court of Appeal considered the Denton principles in some detail. The judgment provides a useful reminder of some basic principles. Firstly that a litigant seeking relief from sanctions cannot complain about the original…
HIGH COURT TACKLES SOME DIFFICULT PROCEDURAL ISSUES (1): IS A PREVIOUS BREACH NECESSARY FOR A PEREMPTORY ORDER TO BE MADE
We are looking at judgment that is, essentially, all about procedural compliance and the court’s approach to making “unless orders”. The approach of the appellate court to case management decisions could be added to that list. It is a detailed…
HIGH COURT SETS ASIDE AN ORDER MADE FOLLOWING AN APPLICATION WITHOUT NOTICE : THIS IS A REHEARING IN FULL – THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE TO SHOW AN ERROR SUCH AS TO WARRANT SETTING ASIDE THE ORIGINAL ORDER
Here we look at a case where the court set aside an order made without notice. The Master found that the evidence presented to him at the initial hearing was “neither full nor frank”. It is a reminder of the…
COST BITES 341: THIS ASSESSMENT SHOULD NOT LAST 50 DAYS: COURT OF APPEAL ADVOCATES “SAMPLING” APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT OF £44 MILLION BILL OF COSTS
It is rare for a court, particularly the Court of Appeal, to take one step aside from the issue being determined and make some general observations on the process of the assessment of costs. This is one of those rare…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 52 : IF THE DEFENDANTS WERE PLEADING THAT INVIDIVIDUALS WERE INVOLVED IN POSITIVE DECEPTION THEN THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PLEADED
Here we have a case where the judge found that the defendants’ case was pleaded in such a way that it did not allow them to make specific allegations of deception about particular individuals. If the defendants had a case…
YOU HAVE TO PAY THE FULL COURT FEE: THE FACT THAT A COURT HAS ACCEPTED A FEE DOES NOT RENDER IT “FUNCTUS OFFICIO”
Here we have an ingenious argument that a court could not claim a higher court fee. It was an ingenious argument that failed. This shows the importance of claimants knowing the value of a case when they issued, and the…
THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH WAS NOT SIGNED BY AN AUTHORISED PERSON: IT REQUIRES “FACTS” NOT INFORMATION: A SOLICITOR EMPLOYEE SHOULD NOT HAVE SIGNED IN THE NAME OF THE FIRM
Here we have an example of a Statement of Truth that was non-compliant it contained the wrong wording and was signed by the wrong person in the wrong way. It shows the need to ensure that the rules in relation…
PART 36 OFFERS ON COSTS: JUDGE ALLOWS DEFENDANT’S APPEAL: THE OFFER HAD NOT BEEN BEATEN, THE COSTS OF PREPARING THE BILL WERE NOT RECOVERABLE
I am grateful to barrister James Miller for sending me a copy of this decision which highlights an important issue in relation to Part 36 and the assessment of costs. At first instance a Deputy District Judge found that the…
PART 36 IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS: WHAT PRACTITIONERS NEED TO KNOW: WEBINAR 26th FEBRUARY 2.00 pm (THREE TRACTORS, TWO FIELDS AND FAILING TO BEAT AN OFFER BY A “WHISKER”)
The past 12 months have seen some important cases about Part 36. Every civil litigator needs to keep up to date with these developments. This webinar looks at the cases and considers the practical implications for litigators. DATE AND TIME…
EXPERT WATCH 32: A REVIEW OF THE CASE LAW AS TO THE INDEPENDENCE (OR OTHERWISE) OF EXPERT WITNESSES
We are looking again at a case looked at yesterday. This is because the judgment contained a useful summary of many leading cases relating to the question of expert bias, or apparent bias. “It is always desirable that an expert…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026: REMEMBER WE LOOK AT THESE PROBLEMS TO TRY TO MAKE SURE YOU DON’T HAVE THEM
The next webinar in the “Avoiding the Pitfalls” series is a 90 minute long webinar on the 6th February 2026. The webinar examines the most common procedural problems and practical difficulties that arise in civil litigation. It explores where and…
BEWARE OF FALSE (OR AT LEAST MISLEADING) DOCUMENTS WITH “COURT SEALS”: “CLUMSY ATTEMPTS WHICH COULD MISLEAD MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC…”
We have seen a few occasions where someone has produced an “official” court document which turned out to be no such thing. We see another example here, a “warrant” that, on the face of it had a red circular seal…
ONE OF THE PERILS OF OBTAINING AN INJUNCTION: AN INTERVENER GIVEN LIBERTY TO APPLY TO BRING A POTENTIAL CLAIM FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY AN INJUNCTION: LITIGATORS MUST GIVE CAREFUL ADVICE…
A party seeking an injunction is usually required to give an undertaking as to damages. That undertaking normally extends to the defendants/respondents to the injunction. However the terms of the injunction often give third parties affected by the injunction a…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A DENIAL: IF YOU DENY – YOU HAVE TO SAY WHY…
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. It is important that practitioners know the…
PART 36: DOES A JUDICIAL READING DAY COUNT IN THE CALCULATION OF “21 DAYS” ? WHAT A DIFFERENCE A (READING) DAY MAKES…
We have seen numerous cases on this blog where matters have been left the “last minute” and the rules as to the calculation of time become important. Here we have an interesting example in relation to Part 36. An offer…
COST BITES 335: DID FIXED COSTS APPLY? THE EXCEPTIONS, THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS AND THE EFFECT OF PART 36 CONSIDERED
I am grateful to Aofie Murphy from Brabners for sending me a copy of this judgment this morning. It relates to fixed costs (i) the exceptions; (ii) the transitional provisions; (iii) whether a Part 36 offer displaced them. It has…
THE COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A PEREMPTORY ORDER IN A SOLICITOR – CLIENT ACTION: LOTS TO LEARN HERE IN TERMS OF BOTH COSTS AND PROCEDURE
Here we are looking at a case that bristles with issues both in relation to solicitor and own client costs, but also in relation to civil procedure and compliance with court orders. It serves as a reminder that a client…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON’T COMPLY WITH THE RULES: 10 REASONS WHY GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT (FROM JANUARY 2018)
Today we go back to a post from January 2018 on a point that remains just as relevant today. There is a mandatory requirement that a witness give the source of their information and belief. A surprising number of witness…
SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON SPECIFIC ISSUES: WHEN SHOULD A “COMPELLING REASON” PREVENT JUDGMENT BEING GIVEN? (NOT HERE…)
One ground for resisting an application for summary judgment is that there is a “compelling reason why the case or issue should be disposed of at trial”. It is unusual for the issue of a “compelling reason” to be considered,…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 50: A CHANGE OF COUNSEL IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO PERMIT AMENDED PLEADINGS(AKA WHY FAMILY LAWYERS NEED TO READ THIS SERIES…)
I cannot recall dealing with a case in this series which involved the Family Courts. However we have a detailed exposition and consideration of the relevant principles relating to late amendment here. One factor is the absence of a good…
COST BITES 332 : COURT MAKES AN ORDER FOR INTERIM PAYMENT OF COSTS OF £43 MILLION – AND THIS IS AFTER TAKING A “CAUTIOUS APPROACH” TO THE CLAIMANTS’ EVIDENCE
This judgment given today contains a number of important points in relation to costs. The headline point is obviously an interim award of £43 million was made. This was actually less than 50% of the sum being sought. One of…
COST BITES: 330 THE ABSENCE OF A COSTS SCHEDULE DOES NOT MEAN THAT A SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT IS GOING TO BE DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS
Here we have an interesting issue about whether the successful respondent to an appeal should be deprived of their costs because a costs schedule had not been filed. The appellant’s alternative argument was that the respondent should be ordered to…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: DO NOT MENTION A PART 36 OFFER TO THE TRIAL JUDGE BEFORE THE TRIAL(OR DURING IT FOR THAT MATTER…)
The first time I wrote on this topic many practitioners expressed surprise that I had written something so very “basic”. Some readers were incredulous. However, as we see below, others shared their experiences. This rule is not known, or not…
PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 2: WAS AN OFFER ON LIABILITY EFFECTIVE IN THIS CONTEXT?
We continue with the detailed examination of the Court of Appeal decision on Part 36 this morning. This aspect of the case is particularly important because, again, although the claimant lost the appeal he won on this particular issue. That…
PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER (1): WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “JUDGMENT” AND AN “ORDER” ?
There are some interesting issues raised in the Court of Appeal decision on Part 36 today that every practitioner should be aware of. The case has been helpfully summarised by my colleague Elliot Kay here. I wanted to break down…
COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 THIS MORNING: AN OFFER OF 90% ON LIABILITY COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE PART 36 CONSEQUENCES WHEN A CLAIM IS APPROVED ON DAMAGES (BUT DID NOT IN THIS CASE).
I am grateful to my colleague Elliot Kay for sending me a note of a Court of Appeal decision on Part 36 given this morning. The issue relates to Part 36 offers on liability where the matter is compromised and…
COST BITES 329: THE COURT’S APPROACH TO INTERIM PAYMENTS ON COSTS THAT ARISE FROM APPLICATIONS AND CLAIMS FOR “OVERSPENDS” – COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET
Some of the basic principles upon which the courts make orders for interim payments are well established, particularly when the case has been budgeted. This case considers the appropriate approach when there is a claim for costs arising from interlocutory…
COST BITES 328: A CAREFULLY NUANCED DECISION ABOUT LIABILITY FOR COSTS, INTERIM PAYMENTS FOR COSTS, INCLUDING COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET
The question of “who won” is usually the starting point of assessing liability to pay costs. Complications arise when one party “won a bit” but not all it was seeking. We have a detailed consideration of these issues here. (Whether…
DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED THE DAY BEFORE THE CCMC: “THIS IS HIGH COURT LITIGATION WHICH IS SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH MUST BE COMPLIED WITH”
Here we see another litigant coming to grief because of a failure to file a costs budget on time. The litigant had been warned of the consequences and the judge found that there was no good reason for the breach. …
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN WITNESS STATEMENTS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR THIRD PARTIES AT COURT: NO NOTICE NECESSARY…
Is a third party, with no relationship to the case, entitled to see the witness statements being used in the hearing? That is the issue considered in this case which, unusually, was an application for judicial review of a County…
CLAIMS AGAINST THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEATHS ARISING FROM COVID WERE STRUCK OUT: CAUSATION COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED
In this case, decided yesterday, the court struck out the claimants’ case alleging that deaths were caused by, or materially contributed to, by the negligence of the defendant. The court had the important caveats in relation to the striking out…
AN APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: THIS IS NOT A “FISHING EXPEDITION” AND IT IS AN APPROPRIATE CASE TO MAKE AN ORDER
It is rare to see a fully reasoned judgment from the High Court in relation to an application for pre-action disclosure. Here we have a case where the rules and principles were considered an applied. There are some important lessons…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: SERVICE ON AN INDIVIDUAL USING S.1140 OF THE COMPANIES ACT 2006
This post reminds claimants that service can take place under s.1140 of the Companies Act on an individual in their capacity as an individual. It also serves as a reminder to defendants, and anyone who is a company director that…
MAZUR MATTERS 46: A “CLAIMANT’S REPRESENTATIVE” HAD NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE IN THIS SMALL CLAIMS TRIAL: “IT IS TO DISTORT THE PURPOSE OF SCH 3, PARA 7 BEYOND RECOGNITION THAT THE TRADITIONAL ROLE OF AN INHOUSE MANAGING CLERK UNDERTAKING THE ROUTINE WORK OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE BE EXTENDED INTO A WHOLESALE UNQUALIFIED ADVOCACY SCHEME”
This is the first time I have seen Mazur mentioned and considered in an issue as to rights of audience. In this case the judge held that the representative sent by the claimant to attend a small claims trial did…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 POINTS TO IMPROVE THE ODDS: LOOKING BACK TO JANUARY 2016
This blog celebrates its 13th birthday later this year. Civil Litigation Brief started as a series in the Solicitors Journal 35 years ago. Needless to say it has a large “back catalogue”. I wanted a regular opportunity to bring important…
WHEN THE COURT REFUSES AN APPLICATION FOR AN EXPEDITED TRIAL: THERE IS NO POINT IN LABOURING THE ISSUE…
This is the first of two cases today where we look at examples where the courts have refused to grant an order for an expedited trial. This case was an unusual one, the judge reviewed the established principles and found…
You must be logged in to post a comment.