THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 53: THE HIGH COURT REJECTS AN ALLEGATION OF IMPROPER CONDUCT IN THE DRAFTING OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: A CLAIMANT CAN BE “TORMENTED” AND THIS IS NOT ABUSIVE…
We are looking at a judgment that goes to the very heart of what a lawyer can properly draft in relation to pleadings. It considers what the line is between putting the case in an “effective and high level way”…
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…
COST BITES 345: RECEIVING PARTY’S FAILURE TO FILE ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT RENDERS THE ASSESSMENT A NULLITY: CLEVER AND COMPLEX ARGUMENTS DID NOT PREVAIL
What are the consequences if a party lodging the documents for a provisional assessment of costs fails to file all the relevant documents and the assessment goes ahead without the judge seeing all the points of dispute? . This is…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: MAKING SURE YOU ARE “LEGALLY STREETWISE”: “CLIENT’S MAY SEEK TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF YOU” (FEBRUARY 2016)
This post started in an unusual way. It was originally an online post from a firm of solicitors (Darlingtons) and I obtained their permission to set out the key points. Unfortunately Darlingtons are no longer trading and the full post…
COST BITES 342: THE CLAIMANTS’ HYPERBOLIC APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT COST THEM DEARLY: PERSONAL LIABILITY FOR £132,400 FOLLOWING THEIR CHALLENGE OF A BILL OF £147,436.33
If a case were needed to warn about the dangers of litigation this is one of them. The claimants challenged a solicitor’s bill of £147,436.33, the bill was reduced by some £18,000 (less than the solicitor had offered to settle…
WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS A SOLICITOR’S FIRM AND THE PROGRESS OF THE CLAIM “HINDERED BY A SERIES OF PROCEDURAL BREACHES”: NOT A GREAT START TO THE CASE
It is a poor start to a solicitor’s application for judicial review of the Legal Ombudsman when the firm itself has failed to comply with rules and directions. We have such a case here. The claimant firm applied for judicial…
SERVICE POINTS 26: CAN THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR THE ALTERNATIVE SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS “IN CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MAY NEVER ARISE”: A PRAGMATIC APPROACH
Can the court take a proactive approach to the service of documents when there are grounds for suspecting that a party will engage in “game playing” as to service in the future? That is the question considered here. The court’s…
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…
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…
MAKING THREATS TO REPORT LAWYERS TO THEIR REGULATORY BODIES IS CAPABLE OF AMOUNTING TO CONTEMPT OF COURT: MAKE THREATS AT YOUR OWN PERIL…
We are looking at a case where a respondent to committal proceedings threatened to make regulatory and other complaints about the conduct of the claimant solicitors. The judge held that such threats made in these circumstances are capable of amounting…
MAZUR MATTERS 49: NEWS FROM CILEX ON LITIGATION PRACTICE RIGHTS: THERE MAY BE A SLIGHT CHANGE OF STANCE BY CILEX
One matter I continue to celebrate is when CILEx members announce that they have been granted Litigation Rights. I know that there are major questions as to whether they are necessary. However in the interim it is most probably prudent…
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…
A FURTHER EXAMPLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE GENERATING PHANTOM REFERENCES AND FALSE QUOTATIONS
We see the another example of the dangers of the use of Artificial Intelligence in this case. Two authorities relied upon by a respondent did not contain the words attributed to them, none of them supported the propositions that had…
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…
MAZUR MATTERS 48: THE INTERIM REPORT: REGULATOR’S GUIDANCE ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION WAS “NOT ALWAYS ARTICULATED WITH SUFFICIENT PRECISION”
The snappily titled “Interim Report: Regulatory review of advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies” from the Legal Services Board is five pages long (including one page spent on…
COST BITES 340: CLAIMANTS’ CONDUCT, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL AND EFFECTIVE REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS
Here we have a case where the claimants were (largely) successful but the court made no order for costs between the parties. There were three major factors (i) the way in which the claimants conducted the action; (ii) the failure…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: HOW DOES THE COURT APPROACH EVIDENCE OF SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED OVER FOUR YEARS BEFORE AND TOOK PLACE WITHIN TWO MINUTES?
This series enables us to look at witness evidence in many different contexts. Here we look at evidence relating to an arrest and events that took place within two minutes. The judge was well aware of the issues that could…
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…
IT IS NOT THE JUDGE’S JOB TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO THE ORDER: THE APPLICANT SHOULD ASK: PENAL NOTICES CONSIDERED
There are a remarkable number of cases about penal notices. Questions such as “are they part of the court order?”; “are the essential for committal proceedings to be brought?” “when should they be added and who should add them” arise…
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…
MAZUR MATTERS 47: MAZUR CITED IN SUBMISSIONS FOR APPLICATION TO ADJOURN: “THIS IS NOT RELEVANT”
Mazur has not featured in many reported cases. However it is mentioned in passing here. For the sake of completeness of the series I have included it. It is (I suspect not the first) where it appears to have been…
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…
SHOULD A LOSING PARTY FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER? A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A HIGH HURDLE WITH A “FORMIDABLE BURDEN”
A litigant who fails to beat a Part 36 offer can normally expect to face the consequences set out in the rules. There is an exception if that litigant can satisfy the court that it is “unjust” for those consequences…
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…
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…
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE
A perennial problem for litigators is the situation where a claimant has a good case but the Defendant is impecunious and uninsured. In many (but not all) motor claims the Motor Insurers Bureau will provide a practical remedy. In all…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A ROBUST OVERTURNING OF THE APPROACH TO THE WITNESS EVIDENCE AT FIRST INSTANCE: “GENERALISED FINDINGS ON CREDIBILITY ARE NOT A USEFUL TOOL FOR RESOLVING SPECIFIC ISSUES OF FACT”
It is unusual to see an appellate court make robust criticisms of the fact finding process at first instance. We have such a judgment here by the Employment Appeal Tribunal. The EAT made it clear that generalised findings as to…
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 333: REMEMBER THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT DETAILED ASSESSMENT TAKES PLACE AT THE END OF PROCEEDINGS, NOT AFTER THE TRIAL OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE
We are returning to a point that can easily be overlooked by a party that has been successful at a split trial or a trial of a preliminary issue. Although the court may make an order in that party’s favour,…
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 331: SOLICITOR FAILS TO SHOW THEY WERE OWED £573,529 IN COSTS: NEITHER A LIEN OR THE LEGAL AID CHARGE NECESSARILY GIVES RISE TO A DEBT FROM THE CLIENT
This is an unusual case where a third party challenged a solicitor’s right to be a creditor in an insolvency arrangement. The third party argued that the sums claimed by the solicitors were not in fact recoverable from the respondent. …
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…
PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 3: SO WHY DID THE CLAIMANT LOSE? PLUS – THE STING IN THE TAIL FOR DEFENDANTS…
Earlier posts have shown that the claimant was successful on two of the key issues in relation to the appeal. However litigation can be cruel. A litigant can win on many issues but still lose the case. So it is…
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…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ALWAYS WAS (AND REMAINS) A RISKY BUSINESS
This week we go back to January 2016. It is a post about the dangers of applying for extensions of time to serve the claim form. The points made a decade ago remain equally valid today. We saw several cases…
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…
COST BITES 327: THE COSTS OF FILING AN ERRANT REPLY CONSIDERED: AN APPLICATION PURSUED “AGGRESSIVELY” – COSTS REDUCED TO 10% OF THOSE CLAIMED
Here we have the defendant making a justified, and successful, application to strike out a Reply. However the judge was unhappy with the manner in which the application (and the litigation generally) was being conduced (by both sides). He found…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 49: THE COURT STRIKES OUT TWO HUNDRED PARAGRAPHS OF A REPLY
We are looking at a case that has many procedural points of interest to litigators. We are starting by looking at the judge’s observations on the claimants’ Reply which was described as “Defective” and large parts struck out. There are…
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. …
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: WEBINAR 23rd JANUARY 2025: HOW TO AVOID “DICING WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH”
Readers of this blog know that issues relating to service of the claim form are a regular feature of the blog. There were numerous posts last year. There are likely to be issues throughout 2026. This webinar is designed to…
PROVIDING LEGAL SUBMISSIONS WITH INACCURATE CASE SUMMARIES: THE REPRESENTATIVE WHO WOULD “NEITHER CONFIRM OR DENY” THAT AI WAS USED
We are returning to the vexed issue of the (mis) use of Artificial Intelligence when providing written submissions to the court (in the case the First Tier Tribunal). The judge found that summaries provided were inaccurate. The judgment points…
You must be logged in to post a comment.