COURT SETS ASIDE CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT: CONTENTS WERE UNFAIR AND UNREASONABLE
In Tripipatkul v WH Lawrence Ltd (t/a WH Lawrence Solicitors) [2021] EWHC B13 (Costs) Costs Judge Brown set aside a contentious business agreement between a solicitor and their former client. “The decision in ex parte Cathcart requires the court to…
“THERE IS A WORRYING TREND… IN TERMS OF FAILURE BY EXPERTS GENERALLY IN LITIGATION COMPLYING WITH THEIR DUTIES”
There is an important point about a litigant’s responsibility for the conduct of their own experts (and expert’s conduct generally) in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd (No. 2 Costs) [2021] EWHC 1414 (TCC). This was…
LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT”
Over the years we have seen some biting judgments about the conduct of experts in civil litigation. I struggle to recall one as extraordinary as the judgment of Mrs Justice Joanna Smith in Dana UK AXLE Ltd v Freudenberg FST…
CAN THE COURT MAKE A COSTS ORDER AFTER A THE FIRST PART OF A SPLIT TRIAL? THE RELEVANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER
In Original Beauty Technology Company Ltd & Ors v G4k Fashion Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 954 (Ch) David Stone (sitting as a High Court judge) considered the question of whether the court should make a costs order after a…
CASES WHERE JUDGES GOT TO READ THINGS THAT LAWYERS WISH THEY HAD NEVER WRITTEN
The earlier post about judges reading information about lawyers online has given rise to a lot of comments and commentary. There are occasions when judges, as part of their job, get to read things that lawyers wish they had never…
BUNDLES AGAIN: JUDGES WASTING THEIR BREATH: “HOW MANY YEARS – DECADES – HAVE TO PASS BEFORE THOSE WHO KNOW BETTER AND WHO… ARE BEING HANDSOMELY REMUNERATED COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS?”
Another post that adds to the dozens, if not hundreds, of cases about bundles. The trial bundles were the subject of considerable criticism by Sir James Munby in C (A Child) [2021] EWFC 32. “I forebear from further judicial exhortation…
“THERE ARE NOT TWO SETS OF RULES FOR LITIGATION IN THIS JURISDICTION”: COURT AWARDS INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST A LITIGANT IN PERSON
In Sir Henry Royce Memorial Foundation v Hardy [2021] EWHC 817 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court judge) awarded indemnity costs against a litigant in person. “There are not two sets of rules for litigation in this…
COSTS, CONDUCT AND ASSESSMENT ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: £2 MILLION SPENT TO RECOVER £40,666.47
An earlier post looked at the construction of the Part 36 offer in Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 653 (Ch) Andrew Lenon Q.C. (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division). Here we look at…
“THIS APPLICATION WAS A SIGNIFICANT ABUSE OF THE PROCEDURES … AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE”: THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT, DUTIES TO THE COURT AND THE HAMID JURISDICTION
In the judgment today in DVP & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 606 (Admin) the Administrative Court exercised considered a case referred to it under the “Hamid” jurisdiction…
LAWYERS (AND ALL LITIGANTS) REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT WRITE TO THE COURT WITHOUT COPYING IN THE PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION
For the second time in two days I am writing of a case where a party has written to the court unilaterally, without copying in the other parties. It was a matter raised in the judgment of Mr Justice Fordham…
DELIBERATELY DESTROYED DOCUMENTS IN LITIGATION, ADVERSE INFERENCES AND… REINDEERS
In the judgment today in Active Media Services Inc v Burmester, Duncker & Joly GmbH & Co Kg & Ors [2021] EWHC 232 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver considered the inferences that should be drawn when he found that a party…
WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON’T SETTLE AFTER A MEDIATION: NO ISSUE BASED ORDER, INDEMNITY COSTS AND £127,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS
There is much for litigants and litigators to learn from the judgment on costs of James Mellor QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Cranstoun & Anor v Notta [2021] EWHC 133 (Ch). The dangers of rejecting offers of…
PROVING THINGS 196: PROVING THAT FILES WERE (OR WERE NOT) DELIVERED IS MORE TRICKY THAN YOU MIGHT THINK
The judgment of Master Clark in The Law Society of England and Wales (Solicitors Regulation Authority) v Sophie Khan & Co Ltd [2021] EWHC 2 (ChD) highlights the difficulties involved in proving, or disproving, that a document was delivered. In…
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS OF A TRIAL CONDUCTED REMOTELY
In SLF Associates Inc v (1) HSBC (UK) Bank Plc & Ors [2021] EWHC 5 (Ch) Master Kaye pointed out that taking photographs of participants in a remote court was unlawful. THE CASE The Master was giving judgment in a…
WHEN A LITIGANT HAS “FAILED IN ITS DUTY AT EVERY POINT”: COUNCIL FOUND AT FAULT AND IN DEFAULT
In Nur & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Birmingham City Council [2020] EWHC 3526 (Admin) Mr David Lock QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) commented on the failure of the defendant council to comply with the…
THE IMPORTANCE OF EMBARGOED JUDGMENTS: A REMINDER OF THE COURT OF APPEAL’S JUDGMENT IN O’CONNELL
Draft judgments are often sent to parties in advance, but sent out on an “embargoed” basis – not to be disclosed until after the date they are formally handed down. Recent comments on Twitter leads me to think that this…
JUDGE REFUSES TO RECONSIDER CRITICISMS OF EXPERT WITNESS IN A JUDGMENT: EXPERT DUTIES CANNOT BE DELEGATED
In Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd & Anor v Generics UK Ltd (t\a MYLAN) [2020] EWHC 3270 (Pat) Mr Justice Marcus Smith made some observations about the role of the expert witness and the importance of their evidence being criticised in…
COURTESY, THE ADVOCATE AND THE LAWYER: TEN THINGS TO THINK ABOUT TO HELP YOUR CLIENTS (AND YOURSELVES)
A tweet from a barrister, this afternoon complained, in essence about the “pointless aggression” of an opponent. It has gathered lots of support. One thing that judges, from around the world, are universally keen on is courtesy. This gives me…
WHEN A LITIGANT SEEKS TO DEFEND A CLAIM AT ALL COSTS: A HIGHWAY TO HELL: WHY, IN LITIGATION, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU CAN SEE THE WOOD FOR THE TREES
The judgment of HHJ Mithani QC in Colar v Highways England Company Ltd [2019] EW Misc 17 (CC) has recently arrived on BAILLI. It provides an illustration of the danger of defending a claim “at all costs”. The judge was…
“ALL MATTERS WERE INFECTED FROM THE OUTSET WITH A REGRETTABLE INJUDICIOUS AND PEREMPTORY LACK OF PROFESSIONAL ASSIDUOUSNESS” : FROM AN ORGANISATION THAT SHOULD KNOW MUCH, MUCH, BETTER: JUST TAKE A WITNESS STATEMENT
This blog has looked, many times, at cases that have floundered at trial because of basic failures to investigate the primary facts. Sometimes applications fail because of a fundamental lack of knowledge as to what “facts” are. The judgment…