THE KEY CASES IN FATAL ACCIDENT DEPENDENCY CLAIMS: WEBINAR 6th APRIL 2020
On the 6th April 2020 I am presenting a webinar “The Key Cases in Fatal Accident Dependency Claims” – concentrating upon the assessment of damages in fatal accident cases. THE WEBINAR The means of assessment of fatal accident…
NEW RULE CHANGES: THE RULES WILL NOW GET IT RIGHT ON PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: A SMALL CHANGE THAT TOOK FAR TOO LONG
The 113th update to Practice Direction Amendments makes a small but important change to the rules relating to mitigation of loss. In short it puts the position right and stops the Practice Direction being the shambles it was before. This…
NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE: PLEADING SPECIFIC ISSUES IN RELATION TO THE HIRE OF A REPLACEMENT VEHICLE
The 113th update to Practice Direction Amendments comes into force on the 6th April 2020. It introduces new, and quite specific, obligations on a claimant claiming the cost of a replacement hire vehicle. THE NEW RULE There is a new Paragraph…
BOOK REVIEW: GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS
I have been sent a copy of the 3rd edition of the Guide to Catastrophic Injury Claims by Stuart McKechnie QC and others. I can review it briefly. This is a book that needs to be on your shelf if…
PROVING THINGS 174: ILLEGALITY, THE VAN DRIVER AND THE MOT CERTIFICATE: CLAIMANT STILL ENTITLED TO DAMAGES
I am grateful to Liam Davidson, from Winns Solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Freedman in Jack -v- Borys (Newcastle upon Tyne 20th December 2019). It relates to damages and illegality. Jack-v-Borys-2019 (1) “I think…
PROVING THINGS 173: FAILING TO PROVE ANY KIND OF PAST OR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS: A BLAMIRE AWARD IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR EVIDENCE
There is another aspect of the judgment of Mr Justice Chamberlain in BXB v Watch Tower And Bible Tract Society of Pennsylvannia & Anor [2020] EWHC 156 (QB) that merits attention. Th claimant sought damage for loss of earnings but these…
63 YEARS OLD AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES – MUNKMAN (& EXALL) ON DAMAGES – THE WRITING PROCESS
An earlier post looked at the previous 13 editions of Munkman on Damages for Personal Injury and Death, together with photos. Since more people read law books than write them I thought it would be of interest to describe the…
63 YEARS ON AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES: MUNKMAN ON DAMAGES – ALBEIT WITH A NEW TITLE (1)
The latest edition of what, used to be called, Munkman on Damages is now hot off the press. This is the 14th edition, the first being written in 1956. In this post I look at the history of the book…
APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT’S UPHILL STRUGGLE
The second aspect of the judgment in Essex County Council & Ors v Davies & Ors [2019] EWHC 3443 I want to look at is the defendants’ appeal in relation to damages. This case reiterates the difficulties (for claimants and defendants)…
CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – NOVEMBER 2019
Here we have links to blogs and articles about civil procedure and costs from November 2019. COSTS Costs Barrister Blaming others Costs Barrister The undiscovered country Herbert Smith Freehills Court of Appeal confirms jurisdiction to award claimant interim payment on account of costs…
PROVING THINGS 168: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION:STATEMENTS OF OPINION OR BELIEF CARRY NO WEIGHT
The Court of Appeal judgment today in Irani v Duchon [2019] EWCA Civ 1846 adds to the Proving Things series in relation to a failure to establish key matters at trial (it also gives me an opportunity to promote the…
THE RIDICULOUS RULES ABOUT PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: DOES THE RULES COMMITTEE JUST NOT LISTEN (OR JUST NOT CARE)?
The previous post in this case on the judgment in Pepe’s Piri Piri Ltd & Anor v Muhammad Ali Junaid Food Trends Ltd (Now Dissolved) & Ors[2019] EWHC 2769 (QB) highlights the problems posed by one of the most ridiculous rules…
COUNTER-SCHEDULES: WORDS OF WISDOM FROM TWITTER
Twitter this afternoon gave rise to a number of interesting discussions about the role of the counter-schedule. I got permission to share some of the contributions. THE START It started with Sarah Pritchard QC looking for ideas for a talk…
PROVING THINGS 164: THE NEED FOR A CAR FOR PRIVATE PURPOSES IS NOT SELF PROVING AND THE COURT WILL NOT INFER SUCH A NEED.
In Hussain v EUI Ltd [2019] EWHC 2647 (QB) Mr Justice Pepperall dismissed a claimant’s appeal in relation to the assessment of damages. “Need for social and domestic purposes is not self-proving and, in this case, cannot simply be inferred”…
PROVING THINGS 163: PROVING MITIGATION OF LOSS: A CLAIMANT NEED NOT TAKE THE RISK OF STARTING UNCERTAIN LITIGATION AGAINST A THIRD PARTY
The need for a defendant to prove a failure to mitigate is something that has been covered before on this blog. In Natixis SA v Marex Financial & Ors [2019] EWHC 2549 (Comm) Mr Justice Bryan considered the legal principles. …
CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES: WHY JUDGES GO “BACK TO BASICS”: A REMINDER FOR LITIGATORS
This is the first of a series of posts designed (to be frank) to remind people that the next edition of “Damages for Personal Injury and Death” will be published later this year. One interesting aspect of writing a book,…
WEBINARS: (1) LOSS OF EARNINGS (2) COURT FEES – AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: TWO PLUGS
Just a brief reminder of two webinars this month: one on loss of earnings, the other on court fees and associated issues. CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS This webinar “Claims for loss of earnings: law, procedure and evidence, prove it…
PART 8 PROCEDURE USED FOR CLAIM FOR £2.6 MILLION: THE CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF – IS ANYONE SURPRISED?
A common practice has occurred of issuing Part 8 proceedings under the MOJ Protocol and “parking” cases there for an extended period. This is an extremely dangerous practice. It is even more dangerous if the case that has been parked…
THE CHANGE IN THE DISCOUNT RATE: LINKS TO THE NEW SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
The change in the discount rate has led to the Government Actuary’s Department producing supplementary tables which include the – 0.25% rate. The relevant page can be found here. LINKS TO THE TABLES Actuarial tables for use in personal…
PROVING THINGS 158: NOW – WHY WOULDN’T BANKS WANT TO REVEAL DETAILS OF THE BONUSES THEY PAID?
The judgment in Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) Ltd & Ors v HM Revenue and Customs [2019] EWHC 1922 (Ch) demonstrates a strange position on the part of the claimant bank. The claimant banks did not adduce any evidence to prove…