WINDING UP PETITION NEEDS TO BE ISSUED IN LOCAL COURT: TYNE FOR PETITIONERS TO CHANGE THEIR PRACTICES
In The One Collection Real Estate Ltd v Insolvency & Law Ltd [2023] EWHC 2673 (Ch). HHJ Kramer held that a winding up petition should be issued and heard in the circuit that has closest links to the case. A block policy…
“A COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE WAY OF PREPARING FOR AN IMPORTANT HEARING”: NON-COMPLIANT AND INCOMPLETE BUNDLES: WITNESS STATEMENTS IMPROPERLY PREPARED
The judgment of HHJ Pearce in Shobeiry v Patel [2023] EWHC 2549 (KB) shows how failing to comply with the rules can lead to major problems in relation to hearings. Here there was non-compliance with the rules relating to bundles,…
THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE HANDBOOK FOR LITIGANTS IN PERSON: A REMINDER OF THE FOUR GOLDEN RULES FOR DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS
It is ten years since the publication of the Handbook for Litigants in Person. It can be found here. I wrote about it, briefly, when it was first published. Although there have been some procedural changes since the section on…
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…
THE CIVIL COURTS ARE “NOT THE WILD WEST”: ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE NEW ARGUMENTS ON APPEAL REJECTED: SKELETON ARGUMENT SHOULD HAVE DEALT WITH POINTS THE DEFENDANT NOW WANTED TO ARGUE
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Morgan-Rowe v Woodgate [2023] EWHC 2375 (KB). This looks at the judge’s view of attempting to run an argument that was not made at trial (indeed, in part, admitted…
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…
“FORENSIC SPEED DATING” IS NOT A DESIRABLE EXERCISE: PRACTITIONERS SHOULD LIMIT THE NUMBER OF AUTHORITIES CITED
In a post-script to the judgment in Invest Bank PSC v El-Husseini & Ors [2023] EWHC 2302 (Comm) Stephen Houseman KC, sitting as High Court Judge, raised concerns over the number of authorities cited and the impact this has on…
COURTS THAT ARE (OR MAY BE) CLOSED ON THE 25th, 27th AND 29th SEPTEMBER 2023
The weekly HMCTS update reports that a number of courts are closed due to industrial action. The update lists those courts that were closed last Friday. Presumably there is a strong probability that the same courts will be closed on…
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…
SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS: SECTION 1140 OF THE COMPANIES ACT CAN BE USED TO SERVE A DIRECTOR RESIDENT ABROAD
In Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC v Shetty & Ors [2020] EWHC 3423 (Comm) [a case newly arrived on BAILII) Mr Justice Bryan held that s.1140 of the Companies Act 2006 can be used to serve proceedings on a director,…
NEW RULES AS TO ADMISSIONS: READ THEM HERE: IN FORCE 1st OCTOBER 2023
The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.3) Rules 2023 introduce a “new” Part 14 on admissions. The is not to make any substantial changes but are part of a process of simplifying the rules. So, for instance, the criteria for seeking to…
MESSAGE FROM THE DESIGNATED CIVIL JUDGE IN MANCHESTER: STAFF REDUCTIONS IN THE COURTS HAVE CONSEQUENCES: PRACTICAL POINTS TO HELP
It is a sign of the times when the Designated Civil Judge sends out a message dealing with pressures on the Court, and staff in particular. Manchester Law Society has a “Message from the Designated Civil Judge” in which the…
BACK TO BASICS 98: COPYING THE OTHER SIDE INTO CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE COURT: IT IS DANGEROUS TO ASSUME THAT THESE ARE “ADMINISTRATIVE” MATTERS
I am grateful to barrister Justin Bates for drawing my attention to the final paragraphs of the judgment of Mr Justice Fordham in Debenham-Schon v Anchor Hanover Group [2021] EWHC 3023 (QB). It concerns the duty of a litigant to…
THE UNSETTING TRUTH ABOUT SETTLING PART 1: MORE MISSIVES FROM CANADA: “EXPERIENTIA DOCET”
We are continuing with our look at articles by the retired Canadian judge, The Honourable Joseph Quinn. For those who haven’t read them. For those unfamiliar with his work it is always worth reading Things Lawyers do to Annoy Judges, and…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: AMBIGUITY IN DEFENDANT’S INSTRUCTIONS LED TO A (VERY RARE) CASE OF A CLAIMANT SUCCEEDING ON CPR 6.15
In London Fluid System Technologies Ltd & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v HM Revenue and Customs [2023] EWHC 2206 (Admin) Mrs Justice Foster made an order under CPR 6.15 when the claimants had mistakenly served the defendant at…
WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE AFTER JUDGMENT ON LIABILITY: A REVIEW OF THE CASES
We are looking again at the judgment of Jason Beer KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Celebrity Speakers Ltd v Daniel & Ors [2023] EWHC 2158 (KB). The judge had to consider what a defendant could argue as…
TWELVE KEY POINTS FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS ABOUT BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY (AND A PLUG FOR A WEBINAR)
I still see, on a fairly regular basis, problems caused in personal injury cases where a claimant is bankrupt and has failed to tell their lawyers. Equally often there are cases where it is clear that a claimant is, or…
WHEN LAWYERS GIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IS ESSENTIAL
We are looking back at a post in 2019. Primarily because the issues the case raises in relation to lawyers making witness statements are prevalent. There are numerous examples on this blog of the difficulties that can occur when a…
THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WERE TOO LONG, TOO CONFUSING AND DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES.
In Halsion Limited v St Thomas Street Development Limited [2023] EWHC 2045 (TCC) HHJ Cawson KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, struck out the claimant’s Particulars of Claim. The Particulars were too long and rambling and failed to comply…
CONCISION AND BREVITY IS BEST: (I’M SAYING THIS AGAIN…): EXAMPLES FROM HOME AND ABROAD
I am mining the back catalogue of this log (that is repeating myself again) to look at a post originally written in August 2016. It looked at judicial complaints about the length of submissions. This was where the judges were…
DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLY TO APPLICATIONS TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENTS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In FXF v English Karate Federation Ltd & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 891 the Court of Appeal stated, categorically, that the Denton principles must be considered where a defendant applies to set aside a default judgment. Firstly there was binding…
ADVISING ON THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: A RECAP: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”
Continuing with the look back at previous years we are looking at a post written in July 2019 about advising on the risks of litigation. “The difficulties facing those giving advice about litigation is summed up in a…
A LICENCE TO THRILL: JAMES BOND, THE MOVIES AND THE COURTS: LEGAL TALES THAT WON’T SCARE THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS OUT OF YOU
This morning I am encouraging you to read ‘James Bond and the Law’ : A talk to the Manchester Business and Property Courts Forum [2023] UKSpeech 7REH2, given by Mr Justice Foxton. A look through at the James Bond franchise…
PERMISSION GIVEN FOR “UPDATING” WITNESS STATEMENTS: PARTIES NEED TO CONSIDER DIRECTIONS FOR UP-TO-DATE FACTUAL EVIDENCE
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 1770 (KB) is an example of how consideration needs to be given to “updated” witness statements in a case where there situation is…
“E-MAIL EXCHANGES COULD BE 2,000 OR 4,000 PAGES APART”: A JUDGMENT ABOUT BUNDLES (WHERE YOU CAN SEE SOME FAIRLY GRUMPY CORRESPONDENCE)
In Bailey -v- Stonewall Equality Ltd, Garden Court Chambers & others the Employment Tribunal awarded £20,000 costs against the respondents (in what is normally a no- costs regime) because of the chaotic way that the application bundle had been presented. …
REDACTION OF DOCUMENTS SHOULD NOT BE ROUTINE: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT DECISION
In FMA & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 1579 (Admin) Mr Justice Swift made the point the redaction of documents in judicial review proceedings should not be routine. THE CASE The judge was…
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…
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION: A RECAP OF THE FIRST SERIES
As part of the scroll through the “back catalogue” on this blog we are looking at the series from 2013 on avoiding negligence. Remember that this series was written 10 years ago. There may have been some changes since then,…
“GIVEN THE INCOMPETENT WAY THE LITIGATION HAD BEEN CONDUCTED TO DATE”: CIRCUIT JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE AND ADJOURNMENT AND RIGHT IN STRIKING OUT THE CLAIM
In Brem v Clark & Anor [2023] EWHC 1358 (KB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer dismissed an appeal against a decision to strike out an action. The claimant’s counsel failed to attend at the hearing, but the judge was correct to…
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…
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…
TEN YEARS OF BLOGGING : A DECADE OF CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF: A QUICK LOOK BACK AND AN EVEN QUICKER LOOK FORWARD
The 24th June 2023 marks the 10th anniversary of the start of the blog. I did worry, when I started, whether there would be enough material to . However, over the past 10 years I have never been short of…
USING TRANSLATORS: COURT HEARINGS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHERE CAN IT ALL GO WRONG
In Alam v Alam & Anor [2023] EWHC 1460 (Ch) the Court had to deal with issues relating to translators and witness statements. There were several issues in relation to the use of translators. The evidence of one witness was…
CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER WAS FOR 96% OF THE CLAIM: IT WAS HELD UNJUST FOR NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY
In Yieldpoint Stable Value Fund, LP v Kimura Commodity Trade Finance Fund Ltd [2023] EWHC 1512 (Comm) Stephen Houseman KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that it was not unjust to disallow the normal Part 36 consequences in…
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…
CLAIMANT’S CONVENTION CLAIM DISMISSED FOLLOWING ATTEMPT TO AMEND AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD
I am grateful to Barrister Katherine Howells for sending me a copy of the judgment in Hallett -v- TUI Airways Limited, a copy of which is available here Approved Judgment Hallett v TUI Airways Limited. The case deals with the…
COST BITES 90: CLAIMANTS LIABLE TO PAY 5% OF DEFENDANT’S COSTS: HUMAN RIGHTS, PERSONAL INJURIES AND “MIXED CLAIMS”
In ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Ors, Re Costs [2023] EWHC 1337 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill considered the liability of the claimants to pay costs in a “mixed claim” which was, primarily, a personal injury claim. She…
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…
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…
FAILURE TO PAY CORRECT COURT FEE WHEN LODGING PROCEEDINGS AT COURT MEANS ACTION BITES THE DUST: CPR 3.9 AND 3.10 CANNOT HELP
In Peterson & Anor v Howard De Walden Estates Ltd [2023] EWHC 929 (KB) the unfortunate claimant failed to fail the correct fee. The court declined to issue proceedings. Consequently the claim was out of time Mr Justice Eyre held…
ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE TO BRIGHTEN UP YOUR DAY: SERVICE AT THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS: CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL IN HIS ARGUMENTS ABOUT KNOWLEDGE
There are a number of issues relating to service of the claim form in the judgment of Peter MacDonald Eggers KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Boettcher v (Xio (UK) LLP & Ors [2023] EWHC 801 (Comm). Here…
CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO CONTINUE WITH THIRD SET OF PROCEEDINGS REFUSED: CPR 38.7 CONSIDERED IN DETAIL
In Danielewicz v Cannon & Anor [2023] EWHC 948 (KB) Master Thornett refused the claimant’s application for an order under CPR 38.7. The claimant had issued proceedings twice before, but discontinued those actions. The judgment contains a detailed consideration of…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: WEBINAR 25th APRIL 2023
This blog spends a lot of time looking at cases where things have gone wrong, for one reason and another. This webinar on the 25th April 2023 looks at the main problem areas in litigation and the practical steps that…
LITIGANTS SUBJECT TO A CIVIL PROCEEDINGS ORDER CANNOT ISSUE VALID PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT PRIOR ORDER FROM THE COURT: “RETROSPECTIVE PERMISSION” HAD NO EFFECT: ACTION WAS A NULLITY
In Williamson v The Bishop of London & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 379 the Court of Appeal held that a person subject to a Civil Proceedings Order must obtain permission from the High Court so they could issue valid proceedings. …
PART 36 RULES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: WAS THE OFFER MADE IN TIME? WAS THE OFFER VALID? WHEN DOES A TRIAL “START”? WAS IT UNJUST FOR THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY?
The judgment of Andrew Sutcliffe KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, in Mate v Mate & Ors [2023] EWHC 806 (Ch) involves a consideration of several issues in relation to Part 36. The judge decided that a Part 36…
INSURER FAILED IN PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION: BUT… IF THE RIGHT PARTY HAD BROUGHT THE APPLICATION IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED
The judgment of Mr Justice Baker in Holt v Allianz Insurance Plc [2023] EWHC 790 (KB) is another round in a long running battle between car hire companies and insurers. Whilst the insurer may have lost this round it is…
You must be logged in to post a comment.