“THIS IS AN UNUSUAL PROBATE CLAIM IN THAT THE DECEASED SAYS SHE IS VERY MUCH ALIVE”: A CHAOTIC TRIAL WHERE NO-ONE SEEMS TO HAVE THE SAME PAGINATION IN THE BUNDLES: AND THATS NOT EVEN HALF OF THE PROBLEMS…
The past few weeks have led to a number of cases about bundles. My working theory about trial and application bundles is that problematic bundles often reflect a much deeper malaise in the case itself. Support for that theory can…
COST BITES 221: A FAILURE TO AGREE TO MEDIATE DID NOT LEAD TO A REDUCTION IN A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS
In Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd (Re Consequential Matters) [2025] EWHC 503 (KB) Mr Justice Constable rejected the claimant’s argument that the successful defendant’s refusal to attend mediation should lead to a reduction in the defendant’s costs. The case…
IT WOULD BE AN “AFFRONT TO JUSTICE” TO ALLOW THE CLAIMANT’S CLAIM TO SUCCEED: “LIES IN THE COURSE OF LITIGATION ARE OFFENSIVE TO THE COURT”: SOME VERY UNCLEAN HANDS…
We are looking again at the judgment of HHJ Paul Matthews in Bains v Irshad & Anor [2025] EWHC 491 (Ch). This time about the consequences of telling lies to the court. The equitable doctrine that most lawyers remember best is the…
JUDGE DOES NOT ALLOW A WITNESS TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN A PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: IT CONTAINED “INADMISSIBLE AND IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE” THAT “ATTEMPTS TO USURP MY ROLE IN A CASE”
In Russell v Coulter (Rev1) [2025] EWHC 493 (KB) Mr Justice Saini disallowed the calling of a witness that the claimant planned to call in an action for professional negligence. The witness statement relied upon contained opinion and inadmissible commentary. …
“A POINTLESS WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY”: ATTEMPTS TO “REOPEN” ISSUES WHEN A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT ARE HARDLY EVER FRUITFUL – AND CAN BE EXPENSIVE
There are a number of cases on this blog where litigants have attempted to “reopen” issues when a draft judgment is sent out to the parties for editorial corrections. We have an example in the judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies…
DISHONEST EXAGGERATION WAS NOT SUFFICIENTLY SIGNIFICANT TO AMOUNT TO FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: THIS WAS DISHONEST EMBELLISHMENT TO UNDERPIN AN ESSENTIALLY HONEST CLAIM
In Boyd v Hughes [2025] EWHC 435 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter decided, by the very narrowest of margins, that the claimant’s deliberate exaggeration of her claim did not amount to fundamental dishonesty. There was some exaggeration of the effect…
WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST FIRM OF SOLICITORS FOR FAILING TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL TO ATTEND A HEARING
In A Father v A Mother [2025] EWHC 364 (Fam) Ms H Markham KC, sitting as Deputy High Court judge, made a wasted costs order against a firm of solicitors. The solicitors had failed to take steps to ensure that…
COST BITES 217: CLAIMANTS TO PAY THE DEFENDANTS’ COSTS OF THE BUDGETING HEARING: THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS “ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LINE”
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Constable in GS Woodland Court GP 1 Ltd & Anor v RGCM Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 285 (TCC), looked in the previous post. Because of the nature of the budget that the…
COST BITES 215: NON-COMPLIANT POINTS OF DISPUTE STRUCK OUT – BUT THE COMPLIANT PARTS REMAIN.
In Christodoulides v CP Christou LLP [2025] EWHC 214 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered the appropriate approach were part of the Points of Dispute to a bill of costs were non-compliant. He held that the appropriate course of…
COST BITES 214: SHOULD THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST A CLAIMANT WHEN THE COSTS BUDGET HAS BEEN GREATLY REDUCED? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED
In Zavorotnii v Malinowski [2025] EWHC 260 (KB) HHJ Karen Walden-Smith considered the arguments as to whether a major reduction in a party’s costs budget should lead to an order for costs being made, rather than an order for costs…
CAN AN EXPERT WORK ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS? IT MAY BE POSSIBLE – BUT IS DEFINITELY NOT WISE
I am grateful to Professor Keith Rix for allowing me to use an article that appears in February’s Expert Healthcare Witness Matters*. This deals with the question of whether an expert can, or should, agree to act on a conditional…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW XV: REMEMBER JUDGES MAY BE TALKING ABOUT YOU: ADVICE FROM THE STREETS OF SAN FRANCISCO
Here we look at an interview with San Francisco Superior Court Judge, Curtis Karnow. The interview was about a book the judge had written “Litigation in Practice“, which is available in the UK. The original interview by is Ros Todd. As…
WHEN A PARTY CITES, AND RELIES, ON CASE LAW THAT “DOES NOT EXIST” :”A MOST UNHAPPY FEATURE OF THIS CASE”
There is a very unusual element to the judgment of Mr Justice Kerr in Olsen & Anor v Finansiel Stabilitet A/S [2025] EWHC 42 (KB). The appellants, litigants in person, relied on case law that apparently supported their case. That…
COST BITES 212: ARGUMENTS ABOUT DEDUCTIONS OF COSTS FROM CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT 2015 AND THE SRA CODE OF CONDUCT
We are again returning to the judgment of Cost Judge Rowley in Perrett v Wolferstans LLP [2025] EWHC 68 (SCCO). Here we examine the claimant’s (former client’s) arguments in relation to the deduction of costs breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015…
COST BITES 211: THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: LARGE ELEMENTS OF POINTS OF DISPUTE STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INADEQUATE PARTICULARISATION
In St Francis Group 1 Ltd & Ors v Kelly & Anor [2025] EWHC 125 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard struck out large parts of a defendant’s Points of Dispute. The Points of Dispute were inadequately particularised. The judgment contains an…
EXTRAORDINARY CONDUCT WHICH LED TO SOLICITOR’S UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM A PROTECT PARTY’S DAMAGES: JUDGMENT FROM THE SCCO
In AKS v National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd [2025] EWHC 126 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard recounted an extraordinary set of facts where a solicitor had wrongly deducted sums from their client’s damages. The judgment shows that this issue…
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW XIV: “RAMBO TACTICS” DO NOT WORK (NEITHER DO THREATENING YOUR OPPONENT WITH A PROCTOLOGY EXAMINATION OR MAKING FACES AT THE JUDGE…)
Continuing with revisiting guidance from judges in relation to advocacy. Here I advocate (hopefully in a civil way) learning from one judgment. That is the judgment of District Judge Chin in the extraordinary case of Revson -v- Cinque & Cinque in…
MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT AND REDUCTIONS IN COSTS – A REVIEW OF THE CASES II: KERINS -V- HEART OF ENGLAND: COSTS REDUCED BY 50%
We are continuing this series looking at issues of misconduct in the assessment process by looking at the decision of District Judge Griffith in Kerins -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust (Birmingham, 31st July 2015). The claimant’s costs were reduced by…
MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT AND REDUCTIONS IN COSTS – A REVIEW OF THE CASES 1: LAHEY -v- PIRELLI TYRES LIMITED
Recent cases on the issue of costs being reduced, or disallowed, due to the conduct of the assessment proceedings have led me to review the cases on this topic. This is the first in a series of posts about the…
“PROFESSIONALISM DEMANDS THAT LAWYERS PICK THEIR BATTLES WISELY”: JUDGE GRANTS EXTENSION AND ORDERS THE LAWYERS TO GO TO LUNCH TOGETHER…
Coming to the end of the year, and with Christmas nearly upon us, all lawyers could benefit from reading the judgment of Chief U.S. District Judge David Proctor in McCullers v. Koch Foods of Ala., LLC in 2024 WL 4907226…
CASE STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH UNLESS ORDER: APPLICATION TO ADJOURN TO ALLOW RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATION REFUSED: DENTON CRITERIA CONSIDERED
In Gladwin v RSM UK Restructuring Advisory LLP [2024] EWHC 3054 (Ch) ICC Judge Barber held that the claimant’s case was struck out because of a failure to comply with a peremptory order. The judge refused the claimant’s application to…
PROMOTING THE ART AND SCIENCE OF THE HUMBLE COURT BUNDLE: A “LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE”: WEBINAR 4th DECEMBER 2024
The problems that courts have with bundles have always been a prominent part of this blog. A post about bundles, “Sedley’s Laws” and how to prepare a bundle was the most read post on the blog for four years. However…
PROVING THINGS 251: TRIAL JUDGE FINDS THAT DEFENDANT’S LETTER WAS NOT WRITTEN CONTEMPORANEOUSLY AND CONCOCTED IN AN ATTEMPT TO EXCULPATE
The judgment of HHJ Berkley in Melia & Anor v Tamlyn And Son ltd [2024] EWHC 3002 (Ch) has a number of interesting aspects in relation to the assessment of evidence. One of those things is the judge’s rejection of…
COST BITES 196: COSTS IN A FAMILY CASE: “EVERY POUND THEY SPEND FIGHTING EACH OTHER IS A POUND THAT WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR THEM AND THEIR CHILDREN”
In LI v FT (Maintenance Pending Suit: Costs) [2024] EWFC 342 Deputy District Judge Harrop made some important remarks in relation to the amount spent in bringing, and defending, an application for maintenance spending suit. “I am dismayed by what…
COST BITES 191: COSTS BILL REDUCED TO NIL BECAUSE OF MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT: “THIS IS THE WORSE EXAMPLE OF TAMPERING WITH A FILE OF PAPERS THAT I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED”
I am grateful to Simon Gibbs of GWS Costs for sending me a copy of the judgment of Costs Judge James in Kapoor -v- Johal [2024] EWHC 2853 (SCCO). The judge made findings of serious misconduct by the receiving party…
THE MAN ON THE CLAPHAM OMNIBUS – WHICH IS NOT A GOOD PLACE TO BE WHEN GIVING EVIDENCE AT A REMOTE HEARING
In Raja & Anor v ATM Law & Ors [2024] EWHC 2782 (Ch) the witnesses gave evidence (or attempted to give evidence) from inappropriate places, including a bus. The judgment of Master Clark shows the need to follow the correct…
LATE SKELETON ARGUMENTS DO NOT A HAPPY JUDGE MAKE II: THE COURT MAY IMPOSE SANCTIONS IN APPROPRIATE CASES
In Corfield v Howard [2024] EWHC 2727 (Comm) HH Judge Davis-White KC (sitting as a Judge of the King’s Bench Division) reminded practitioners of the need for skeleton arguments to be filed in time accordance with court orders. …
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW III: PREPARE PROPERLY AND SEE THE SCENE FOR YOURSELF: A VIEW FROM CANADA
As part of the repeated series looking at the advice that judges give to advocates (and how this relates to civil litigators in particular) we return to Canada. Judge Carol Baird Ellan collected the views of 12 of her colleagues…
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH PARTIES IF THE PART 8 PROCEDURE IS TO BE USED IN MATTERS OF CONTRACTUAL CONSTRUCTION: BEST NOT THROW THE KITCHEN SINK INTO THE MIX
In Workman Properties Ltd v Adi Building And Refurbishment Ltd [2024] EWHC 2627 (TCC) HHJ Stephen Davies sent out a clear reminder of the duties on all parties in a Part 8 case where the court was being asked to…
COST BITES 186: “MY CASE WAS SO HOPELESS I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO PAY YOUR COSTS”: NOT A WHOLLY ATTRACTIVE ARGUMENT
In Mainwaring v Bailey [2024] EWHC 2614 (Fam) Mr Justice Henke ordered an unsuccessful appellant to pay the respondent’s costs. He rejected the appellant’s argument that his appeal was so evidently hopeless that the respondent should not have responded. He…
ANOTHER CASE ABOUT THE LIMITS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: s.57 DOES NOT APPLY TO A CLAIM FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT
In Andrew Reynolds v Chief Constable of Kent Police [2024] EWHC 2487 (KB) Mr Justice Sheldon found that a claim for false imprisonment was not a claim for damages for personal injury. A false imprisonment claim, therefore, was not subject to the…
COST BITES 185: VARYING THE AMOUNT PAYABLE AFTER A CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES: THE COURT CAN TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PRE-DISCONTINUANCE CONDUCT
In her very last judgment in the case of Elphicke v Times Media Ltd [2024] EWHC 2595 (KB) Master McCloud considered the question of whether it is possible for a court to take into account pre-discontinuance conduct when considering whether…
APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS AGAINST CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS DISMISSED: NO DUTY TO “DUMP” A CLIENT WHEN FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY IS ALLEGED
In Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports & Anor (Re Wasted Costs Order) [2024] EWHC 2415 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie dismissed an application for wasted costs against the claimant’s solicitors. This dismissal took place at “stage one” – with the allegations…
PREPARING TRIAL AND APPLICATION BUNDLES: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE: WEBINAR 4th DECEMBER 2024
The previous post on Serra -v- Harvey [2024] EWHC 2250 (KB) has led to me finalising a (long-prepared) webinar on bundles. In Serra wasted costs were ordered on an indemnity basis against the claimant’s solicitors because the lateness and condition of the trial bundles. The bundles…
COST BITES 182: ANOTHER CASE OF A CLAIMANT PAYING THE COSTS OF A BUDGETING HEARING BECAUSE OF AN UNREALISTIC APPROACH
In Jenkins v Thurrock Council [2024] EWHC 2248 (KB) Master Thornett revisited the principles considered in Worcester v Hopley [2024] EWHC 2181 (KB) It was held that the claimant’s unrealistic figures in a costs budget should lead to the claimant paying…
A COUNTER-SCHEDULE THAT TOTALLY TOTALLY FAILED TO DO ITS JOB: COURT REFUSES PERMISSION FOR DEFENDANT TO RELY ON COUNTER-SCHEDULE THAT “SERVES NO PURPOSE WHATSOEVER”
This blog has looked extensively at judicial criticism of schedules of damages over the years. It has to be remembered that counter-schedules also have to be properly drafted. This is emphasised. in the judgment of Mr Justice Julian Knowles in…
VALUATION EXPERTS SHOULD SHOW THEIR CALCULATIONS: ESTIMATING A VALUE AND WORKING BACKWARDS TO JUSTIFY THAT DOES NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE COURT
In Sahota v Sahota & Ors [2024] EWHC 2165 (Ch) HHJ Rawlings (sitting as a High Court Judge)was critical of an expert witness who, in essence, worked backwards in relation to a valuation. The judge found that having come to…
COST BITES 180: EXCESSIVE BUDGET LEADS TO PARTY BEING ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS OF A BUDGETING HEARING
In Nicholas Worcester v Dr Philip Hopley [2024] EWHC 2181 (KB) Master Thornett awarded costs against a party who, the Master felt, had over-inflated their costs budget. The case stands as a warning that a party putting forward a budget which is…
COST BITES 177: SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT RECOVERS ONLY 20% OF ITS COSTS (STILL GETS AN INTERIM PAYMENT OF £2 MILLION)
In Tata Consultancy Services Ltd v Disclosure and Barring Service [2024] EWHC 2025 (TCC) Mr Justice Constable found that a “successful” claimant who had recovered nearly £3.7 million in damages should only recover 20% of its costs. Both parties had…
COST BITES 174: A TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY HAS NO SPECIAL STATUS WHEN IT COMES TO COSTS: “HE HAS NOT SUGGESTED THAT, HAD HE WON, HE WOULD NOBLY DECLINE TO ASK FOR HIS COSTS”
We are returning to the judgment of HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Broom v Aguilar [2024] EWHC 1961 (Ch). The judge rejected an argument that a different order for costs should be made because the respondent/clamant…
COST BITES 172: CLAIMANT WHOSE CASE WAS STRUCK OUT HAD TO PAY THE DEFENDANT’S COSTS
In Khokan v Nirjhor (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 1873 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill rejected an argument that a claimant, whose case had been struck out due to non compliance with a peremptory order, should then not be liable to pay…
THE JOINT MEETING OF EXPERTS AND THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT: WEBINAR 29th JULY 2024
I was a more than a little shocked to read the judgment in Glover & Anor v Fluid Structural Engineers & Technical Designers Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1257 it is a case that shows that lawyers are still making…
COURT MADE PEREMPTORY ORDER THAT CLAIMANT PAY COSTS: ARTICLE 6 RIGHTS NOT INFRINGED
In Khokan v Nirjhor [2024] EWHC 1872 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill granted the defendant’s application for a peremptory order following the claimant’s failure to pay costs ordered against him at an interlocutory hearing. The judge refused the claimant’s application for…
“UNNECESSARILY ARGUMENTATIVE OR WASTEFUL CORRESPONDENCE” NOT COUNTENANCED IN COSTS BUDGETING: “IT TAKES TWO TO TANGO”
The post earlier this morning on “intemperate” comments in court documents and correspondence reminded me that I meant to highlight a particular aspect of the judgment in Pan NOx Emissions Litigations [2024] EWHC 1728 (KB). The judgment highlights that unnecessarily argumentative…
WRITING INFLAMMATORY THINGS IN COURT DOCUMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE: IT NEVER, EVER, HELPS
We are looking at the judgment of HHJ Edward Hess in TM v KM [2022] EWFC 155 for two reasons: firstly the costs involved; secondly the judge’s observations about the unattractiveness of putting personal pejorative remarks in court documents. There…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, EVIDENCE AND DISCLOSURE: WHEN THE JUDGE FINDS THAT THE MEDICAL NOTES ARE NOT ACCURATE: “A CONTRIVED AND FALSE PIECE OF EVIDENCE”
In Biggadike v El Farra & Anor [2024] EWHC 1688 (KB) HHJ Carmel Wall (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that annotations made to medical records were not, in fact, contemporaneous. She rejected the second defendant’s evidence based on…
COST BITES 163: NO DEDUCTION FROM SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT’S COSTS: A POINT OR TWO ABOUT “CLIENT’S” SUBMISSIONS
In McAteer v Hat & Mitre & Ors (Re Consequential Matters) [2024] EWHC 1746 (Ch) Sir Anthony Mann (sitting as a High Court Judge) dismissed the unsuccessful appellant’s application that the respondent’s costs be reduced. There were also some important…
WHEN SHOULD A PART 20 DEFENDANT BE LIABLE TO PAY THE PART 20 CLAIMANT’S COSTS OF DEFENDING THE MAIN ACTION? THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED
In Alison Healey (Widow And Executrix of the Estate of Simon Andrew Healey, Deceased) v Mr Daniel McgRath [2024] EWHC 1360 (KB) Dexter Dias KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered the question of whether it was appropriate…
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…
JOINING A SOLICITOR INTO AN APPLICATION, WITH A THREAT OF COSTS – LED TO THE APPLICANTS PAYING £45,000 IN COSTS
The case of Tonstate Group Ltd & Ors v Wojakowski & Anor [2024] EWHC 1196 (Ch) is a real world example of the dangers of joining a litigant’s firm of solicitors in an application, threatening to seek costs against them. …
You must be logged in to post a comment.