THE REAL DANGER OF LAWYERS GETTING INVOLVED IN THE JOINT STATEMENT OF EXPERTS: IT IS WRONG AND IT IS COSTLY: A CASE THAT ILLUSTRATES THE POINT
In Glover & Anor v Fluid Structural Engineers & Technical Designers Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1257 (TCC) Mr Simon Lofthouse K.C., sitting as a High Court Judge, considered the issues that arose when a party had tried to influence…
PART 36 THE PAST 12 MONTHS: HOW HUGH GRANT AND THE DUKE OF SUSSEX FEATURE IN A WEBINAR ABOUT CIVIL PROCEDURE: USEFUL WATCHING IF YOU HAVE TIME TO SPARE…
The webinar I gave on the 13th May discussing Part 36 cases over the previous 12 months is now available on YouTube on this link. Cases looked at include: Holden -v- Holden – were Part 36 offers valid offers? Colicci…
AVOIDING LIMITATION PROBLEMS AND THE (POSSIBLE) LIFELINE OF SECTION 33: WEBINAR 29th MAY 2024
Over the year this blog has recorded many cases of claimants (but not always claimants) coming to grief because of limitation issues. This webinar is designed to help practitioners avoid limitation problems, looking at major problem areas, common mistakes and…
COSTS BUDGETING: ESSENTIAL GUIDANCE FROM COSTS JUDGE BROWN
Costs Judge Simon Brown has produced a Note to assist in the case management and costs budgeting process in Kings Bench Division involving high value personal injury claim. The purpose of the Note is to “provide a neutral approach to…
AN ACTION THAT HAS BEEN “WAREHOUSED” WILL NORMALLY BE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: COMPELLING REASONS TO THE CONTRARY ARE REQUIRED
In Watford Control Instruments Ltd v Brown [2024] EWHC 1125 (Ch) Mr Justice Richards struck out the claimants action on the grounds that it had “warehoused” the action for several years and this amounted to an abuse of process. Such…
CROSS-EXAMINING EXPERTS: USEFUL GUIDES AND HINTS
There are hundreds of posts on this blog about the role of experts in civil litigation. In many of those cases the experts have been cross-examined and this has not ended well – for them. I have already planned a…
ARGUING ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE BILL: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE DISCLOSURE OF AGENCY COSTS AND MEDICAL FEES WAR: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO COMPLY WITH PART 18 REQUESTS FOR A BREAKDOWN OF THE INVOICE
I am grateful to Ben Millns from Kennedys for sending me a copy of the decision in Parsons -v- Stevens, a copy of which is available here. Deputy District Judge Fentem decided that it was appropriate to make an order…
CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN YOU TELL A WHOPPER THE FIRST TIME AROUND – IT COMES BACK TO BITE YOU IN A SECOND TRIAL
In McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd v Shirayama Shokusan Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 1133 (Ch) Mr Justice Edwin Johnson found that a company had misrepresented its intention at a trial which involved, essentially, the claimant’s right to a new tenancy of business…
A HANDY TIP FOR ANYONE GOING TO THE LEEDS BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURT ON MONDAY: THEY HAVE MOVED…
HMCTS have sent out notice that from Monday 13 May 2024, the Business and Property Court in Leeds will being hearing cases at its new base in West Gate, Grace Street, Leeds. The fourth-floor suite houses four courtrooms and is…
COSTS – WHEN YOU SOMETIMES THINK THE WORLD HAS GONE MAD: SPEND £28,535 TO CHALLENGE AN ATE PREMIUM OF £392…
In Bendriss v Nicholson Jones Sutton Solicitors Ltd [2024] EWHC 1100 (SCCO) Costs Judge Rowley dismissed a claimant’s application for specific disclosure. One notable aspect of the application was that the claimant had spent £28,535 in respect of this one application in…
“GOOGLESPOOFING” AND THIRD PARTY DISCLOSURE: DEFENDANT FAILS TO PERSUADE THE COURT THAT RECORDINGS ARE NECESSARY
In Parker v Skyfire Insurance Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 1060 (KB) Mrs Justice Dias dismissed a defendant’s appeal against a refusal to give disclosure of documents of a third party car hire company. The documents were not necessary to dispose…
EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY TORTURE: THE JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE AND THE SUPREME COURT DECISION
The question of whether evidence obtained by torture in civil proceedings is one that, thankfully, rarely comes before the court. However it was an issue considered in the judgment of Mr Justice Knowles MBE In Shangang Shipping Company Ltd -v-…
IS A PARTY ENTITLED TO SEE THEIR OPPONENT’S CORRESPONDENCE WITH AN EXPERT LEADING UP TO THE JOINT MEETING? AN ISSUE THAT IS IMPORTANT – BUT UNDECIDED
In Frasers Group plc v Saxo Bank AS & Anor [2024] EWHC 188 (Comm) HHJ Pelling KC considered issues relating to whether a party’s correspondence with their expert leading up to the joint meeting of experts should be disclosed. The…
INCREASE IN COURT FEES FROM THE 1ST MAY 2024
Court fees increased from the 1st May. Details of all court fees increased can be seen here. The increases apply in family and tribunal proceedings in addition to civil cases. 172 court fees have been increased by 10%. Here we…
REMISSION TO THE COUNTY COURT: WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
In Sherman & Anor v Reader Offers Ltd (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 412 the Court of Appeal set out the limits that exist when a case is remitted to the county court for an assessment of damages following a successful…
WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: SOME KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL LINKS
Earlier today I gave a webinar on “What to do when things go wrong in litigation”, this was immediately before I went to court to argue a case which, among other things, related to extensions of time to serve the…
MANCHESTER IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE VENUE FOR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN NORFOLK: THE CASE GOES SOUTH…
In Bartosik, R (On the Application Of) v Office of the Police & Crime Commissioner for Norfolk [2024] EWHC 932 (Admin) Mr Justice Fordham held that the Administrative Court in Manchester is not the appropriate venue for a dispute over…
DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM STRUCK OUT BECAUSE THE DEFENDANT RELIED ON WITHOUT PREJUDICE COMMUNICATIONS
In West v Churchill & Anor [2024] EWHC 940 (Ch) HHJ Keyser KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) struck out a defence and counterclaim that referred to without prejudice negotiations and correspondence. There had been no agreement reached between…
LAWYERS MUST LIKE LIVING DANGEROUSLY: APPLICATION MADE THREE MINUTES BEFORE DEADLINE: THE CLAIMANT SCRAPES HOME…
In Lloyds Developments Ltd v Accor HotelServices UK Ltd [2024] EWHC 941 (TCC) Mrs Justice Jefford considered a claimant’s application for an extension of time to comply with a peremptory order which was made 3 minutes prior to the time…
ATTEMPTS TO RE-OPEN ISSUES WHEN A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT: COURT OF APPEAL SAYS NOT AN INVITATION TO RE-ARGUE THE ISSUES
In Supponor Ltd & Anor v AIM Sport Development AG [2024] EWCA Civ 396 the Court of Appeal resisted attempts (by both parties) to re-open key issues after a draft judgment had been sent out. “The primary purpose of this…
TRYING TO SQUEEZE A PART 7 CASE INTO A PART 8 APPLICATION: DISPUTES OF FACT MAKE PART 8 UNSUITABLE
In ISG Retail Ltd v FK Construction Ltd [2024] EWHC 878 (TCC) Neil Moody KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered the question of whether a case was suitable for Part 8 determination. He decided that there were…
PROCEDURE, DAMAGES, LIABILITY, COSTS AND LIMITATION: A SERIES OF WEBINARS THIS YEAR AIMING TO HELP AVOID OR DEAL WITH PROBLEMS IN LITIGATION
The issues arising from many of the cases looked at on this blog are being considered in a series of webinars starting later this month. The webinars cover many of the problem areas of litigation: what to do when things…
WHEN CAN A CLAIM FORM INCLUDE MULTIPLE PARTIES? COURT OF APPEAL REACH BACK TO THE OLD RULES TO HELP
Yesterday I wrote about a case where a judge made strict case management orders in an attempt to deal with an action brought by multiple claimants. The issue of multiple parties was considered today by the Court of Appeal in…
DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSION MADE IN THE PORTAL: ON CONDITION THAT INTERIM PAYMENTS WOULD NOT BE REPAID
I am grateful to solicitor Stratos Gatzouris from DWF law for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Catherine Brown in the case of Jerrom -v- Serco Leisure Operating Ltd (Canterbury County Court 12th February 2023). It is an…
TOO MANY PARTIES CAN INCUR THE COURT’S WRATH: THE DIFFICULTIES IN PLEADING A CASE WHERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE CLAIMANTS
In Niprose Investments Ltd & Ors v Vincents Solicitors Ltd (Professional negligence) [2024] EWHC 801 (Ch) HHJ Hodge KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered some of the issues where 35 claimants attempted to plead their claim on one…
THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES
The Guideline Hourly Rates changed on 1st January 2026. These are set out below. The 2025 and 2024 rates can be found underneath. Guideline hourly rates 2026 (with previous year’s rates in brackets) Grade Fee Earner London 1 London 2…
COURT WOULD NOT SET ASIDE FINAL ORDER FOR DIVORCE CAUSED BY A SOLICITORS ERROR: IT IS MORE THAN A SIMPLE CLICK OF A MOUSE
In Williams v Williams [2024] EWHC 733 (Fam) Sir Andrew McFarlane refused to set aside a final divorce order when the order had been made due to a mistake by the applicant’s solicitors. It is a clear example of the…
COST BITES 142: COSTS ON AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPLICATION TO APPEAL IN A FAMILY CASE
I keep intending to write more about issues of costs in family cases. Not because I want to delve into the intricacies of family law, but because issues of costs have major ramifications for both the clients and practitioners. Even…
TRIALS BY JURY IN CIVIL CASES: THE RULES AND CASES CONSIDERED
In Taylor v Savik & Anor [2024] EW Misc 15 (CC) HHJ Paul Matthews considered the question of whether a jury trial should be ordered in a civil trial. The judgment contains a detailed consideration of the legislation and case…
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE COURTS: SELECTED HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE JUDICIAL GUIDANCE
We have looked before at problems caused by Artificial Intelligence being used in court. It is worthwhile looking at the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary publication “Artificial Intelligence (AI) Guidance for Judicial Office Holders. It shows some of the dangers in…
WITNESS STATEMENTS AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: WHEN LAWYERS CAN BE THEIR OWN WORSE ENEMIES: “THE ABSENCE OF SUCH EVIDENCE IS IN THE NATURE OF A DEAFENING SILENCE”
There are numerous, indeed hundreds, of posts on this blog that deal with the difficulties that can arise in relation to witness statements and witness evidence. Often it is a failure to address basic and fundamental points in relation to…
THE PROFOUND LACK OF WISDOM IN SIGNING STATEMENTS OF TRUTH ON BEHALF OF YOUR CLIENT: A REPEAT
The post earlier this morning about witness evidence in a case where the Particulars of Claim had been signed by a solicitor has raised some interesting observations. Not least commentators have observed that it is, to say the least, profoundly…
THE 163rd UPDATE TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTIONS: COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 6th APRIL 2024 (1)
There are a number of amendments to Practice Directions coming into force on the 6th April 2024. Details of the 163rd update can be found here. OVERVIEW By way of overview the amendments relate to Civil restrain orders. (New…
PART 36: NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT OFFER MADE – REGARDLESS OF FINDINGS OF MISCONDUCT IN THE CONDUCT OF THE LITIGATION
In ABFA Commodities Trading Ltd v Petraco Oil Company SA (Re Consequential Matters) [2024] EWHC 706 (Comm) Mr Justice Foxton found that the normal Part 36 consequences should follow when a party (the effective claimant in the action) had beaten…
COST BITES 139: A CLAIMANT WAS NOT AWARDED COSTS AGAINST HIS OWN SOLICITORS: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU BURY YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND
The judgment of Deputy Master Grimshaw in Al Tarboush v Cassam [2024] EWHC 639 (KB) shows two things: (i) the limitations of the wasted costs procedure; (ii) the major procedural problems that can arise in the course of a case…
COSTS BITES 136: SOLICITORS COULD NOT RENDER BILLS FOLLOWING TERMINATION OF RETAINER: THE REMEDY WAS TO SUE FOR DAMAGES
An earlier post looked at some aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Trower in Winros Partnership v Global Energy Horizons Corporation [2021] EWHC 3410 (Ch). The assessment of costs in that action continued after the appeal. Preliminary points were considered by…
PARTIES SHOULD BE AWARE OF CONGESTION FACING LITIGANTS IN THE COURTS
The judgment of HHJ Pelling KC in ABT Auto Investments Ltd v Aapico Investment Pte Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1791 (Comm) has recently become available on BAILII. The judge refused an application to amend that was heard one month…
A SERIES OF FOUR WEBINARS TO TAKE YOU THROUGH LAW AND PRACTICE RELATING TO FATAL ACCIDENTS
In March and April 2024 I am presenting four webinars which take practitioners through the major issues relating to law and procedure in Fatal Accident Act claims. All of those who subscribe to the webinars will receive comprehensive questionnaires for…
“EYE ROLLING, HEAD SHAKING, GRUNTING, SNICKERING, GUFFAWING AND LOUD MUTTERING”: HARDLY THE STUFF OF GOOD ADVOCACY
In China Yantai Friction Co. Ltd. v Novalex Inc., 2024 ONSC 608 (CanLII), C. Chang.J, made some trenchant observations about the conduct of one of the advocates in the case. “It has long been a tradition and requirement of etiquette…
THE OFFERS WERE NOT PART 36 OFFERS: COURT COULD DETERMINE COSTS OF A PRELIMINARY TRIAL
In Holden v Holden & Anor [2024] EWHC 453 (Ch) Mr Nicholas Thompsell (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered offers made by the defendant to see whether they were in fact Part 36 offers. He held that they…
DISPUTING SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: DEFENDANT FAILED TO USE CORRECT RULE, BUT CPR 3.10 APPLIED
A defendant that wants to dispute jurisdiction should normally apply under CPR Part 11. In The Tintometer Ltd & Anor v Pitmans (a firm) & Anor [2024] EWHC 370 (Ch) Mrs Justice Bacon considered the situation where a defendant had…
THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE: WEBINAR 18th MARCH 2024
We have seen several examples on this blog recently relating to the summary assessment of costs, in some cases the sums assessed have been substantial. This webinar on the 18th March 2024 looks at recent cases and then considers the…
AN APPELLANT CANNOT RE-OPEN THE GROUNDS UPON WHICH IT HAS BEEN GIVEN PERMISSION TO APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Williams v Williams & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 1465 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of whether an appellant could seek to re-open grounds of appeal. The criteria was held to be very restricted and the appellant not…
NEW FORMS FOR ANONYMITY ORDERS: GET THE LINK – SEE THE ORDER
Form PF 10 for anonymity orders has been amended. The latest form can be found here. PF10 Anonymity for children and protected parties – prohibition of publication order [HEADING] [TBC] (a child / protected party…
COURT OF APPEAL – NOT THE CORRECT DESTINATION FOR AN APPEAL RELATING TO THE SENTENCE PASSED ON A JUDGMENT DEBTOR
In Roberts v Jones [2024] EWCA Civ 118 the Court of Appeal held that it was not the correct court to hear an appeal relating to an appeal by a judgment creditor in relation to a sentence passed on a…
COST BITES 134: THE FACT THAT THE DEFENDANT HAD A COSTS ORDER IN ANOTHER ACTION WAS NOT GROUNDS FOR REFUSING AN INTERIM ORDER FOR COSTS
In Baldudak v Matteo (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 301 (Ch) Mr Andrew Sutcliffe KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, made an order for a substantial interim payment of the claimant’s costs. He did not accept the defendant’s argument that…
THE DANGERS OF SERVING A NOTICE OF NON-ADMISSION: LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING AWARDED
Another aspect of the judgment in Duke of Sussex & Ors v MGN Ltd (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 274 (Ch) was the defendant’s conduct in serving a notice of non-admission. Service of the notice led to considerable extra costs being incurred. …
CLAIMANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE THE JUDGE FOUND FOR THE DEFENDANT ON A BASIS THAT WAS NOT PLEADED
I am grateful to barrister Tom Morris for giving me details of the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Jacobs v Chalcot Crescent (Management) Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 259 (Ch). It is an important case about statements of case. The…
“TELL ME MORE, TELL ME MORE”: COURT OF APPEAL SENDS OUT CLEAR MESSAGE OF THE DANGERS OF SEEKING “CLARIFICATION” OF A JUDGMENT: IT MIGHT NOT GET YOU VERY FAR…
In YM (Care Proceedings) (Clarification of Reasons) [2024] EWCA Civ 71 the Court of Appeal issued a clear warning about the misuse of the practice of “seeking clarification” from the judge following a judgment. The decision is aimed specifically at…
PENAL NOTICES ON ORDERS – CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 6th APRIL 2024: A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE BY THE USE OF THE WORD “BY”
Yesterday we looked at a case where the judge held it was inappropriate for the court to add a penal notice to an existing order. The rules relating to penal notices are changing on the 6th April as a result…
You must be logged in to post a comment.