HIGH COURT ISSUES A WARNING TO THOSE PLEADING CLAIM FOR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES: THERE MUST BE A PROPER BASIS FOR SUCH A PLEA
In Underwood & Anor v Bounty UK Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 888 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin sent out a warning about the pleading a claim for exemplary damages. Such claims should only be made where there is a proper…
PROVING THINGS 227: FAILURE TO PROVE A DEBT CLAIM: “THE PROOF REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE CLAIMANT IS ENTITLED TO THE SUMS WHICH IT CLAIMS IS SADLY LACKING”
The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Emery Planning Partnership Ltd v Bevan [2022] EWHC 494 (QB) illustrates a failure by a claimant to prove a debt claim. It is (yet another) object lesson that facts and evidence are needed…
CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS OF THE SELF-EMPLOYED AND THOSE INVOLVED IN ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORT: WEBINAR 14th MARCH 2022
There are 5 million self-employed people in the United Kingdom making up 15.5% of the workforce. A self-employed person (including directors of small companies) face particular difficulties when seeking to recover loss of earnings after being injured. Similarly those who…
CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LEARNING FROM RECENT CASES: WEBINAR 7th MARCH 2022
The “Proving Things” series on this blog often looks at cases relating to loss of income. Recent cases on this topic are explored in a webinar on the 7th March 2022: Claims for Loss of Earnings: Learning from Recent Cases,…
“I FIND THAT THE CLAIM WAS CONSTRUCTED BY THE CLAIMANT’S LAWYERS ON A PREMISE WHICH WAS IRRELEVANT AND WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE OR THE LAW”: WHY MUCH MORE CARE IS NEEDED IN DRAFTING SCHEDULES
We are looking again at the decision in Cojanu v Essex Partnership University NHS Trust [2022] EWHC 197 (QB). This time at the judgment in relation to quantum. The case involved a situation where the claimant’s lawyers presentation of the case…
PROVING THINGS 224: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS: THE IMPORTANCE (& LIMITATIONS) OF THE CLAIMANT’S OWN EVIDENCE
The impairment of someone’s ability to earn their living is always a serious matter. There are a number of approaches that the court can take to the award of damages. Anyone representing a claimant should read McRae -v- Chase International…
PROVING THINGS 223: PROVING A SUBSTANTIAL LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIM (£1,206,053 TO BE EXACT)
In Palmer v Mantas & Anor [2022] EWHC 90 (QB) Anthony Metzer QC (sitting as Deputy High Court Judge) awarded a claimant £1,206,053) in loss of earnings. The judge found that the approach in Smith -v- Manchester was not an…
PROVING THINGS 221: THE COURT WILL NOT SPECULATE
In Hirst & Anor v Dunbar & Ors [2022] EWHC 41 (TCC) Mr Justice Eyre highlighted the need for a claimant to prove losses, and expenditure, the court will not speculate on items relating to expenditure. “In my judgement…
WRONGFULLY ENTERING JUDGMENT GIVES RISE TO A CAUSE OF ACTION FOR A DEFENDANT: THE TORT OF ABUSE OF PROCESS
In Total Extraction Ltd v Aircentric Ltd [2021] EW Misc 21 (CC) District Judge Branchflower found that a claimant that had wrongfully entered judgment on admission was liable in damages to the defendant that had suffered losses as a result. …
THE NEED FOR A CLAIMANT TO PROVE INJURY: WITHOUT EVIDENCE THE ACTION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT
The earlier post on proving causation highlights the matters that claimants need to prove when bringing a claim for damages. One essential element is that a claimant needs to prove damages. One case that shows a clear illustration of this…
THE INTOXICATED PASSENGER AND ESTABLISHING CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In Campbell v Advantage Insurance Company Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1698 the Court of Appeal upheld a finding that a claimant could be contributory negligent even when drunk. However it is important that the facts of this case are looked…
FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES: A CLAIM FOR SERVICES CAN BE BASED ON THE COSTS OF COMMERCIAL REPLACEMENT – WITHOUT DISCOUNT
The Court of Appeal decision in Steve Hill Ltd v Witham [2021] EWCA Civ 1312 contains an important consideration of the basis upon which claims for loss of services are calculated in a fatal accident case. FATAL ACCIDENT -…
SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO DEFENDANT: DAMAGES WERE “DE MINIMIS”: THE LAW WILL NOT SUPPLY A REMEDY WHEN NO HARM HAS CREDIBLY BEEN SHOWN
In Rolfe & Ors v Veale Wasbrough Vizards LLP [2021] EWHC 2809 (QB) Master MCCloud granted the defendant summary judgment in an action for breach of data. “There is no credible case that distress or damage over a de minimis…
WHEN AN EMAIL FROM A SOLICITOR IS EVIDENCE OF LOSS: EVIDENCE AT THE STAGE 3 STAGE CONSIDERED ON APPEAL
I am grateful to barrister Sarah Robson for bringing my attention to the decision of HHJ Jarman QC in Akram v Aviva Insurance Ltd [2021] EW Misc 16 (CC). This is a case that highlights the flexibility the courts have…
JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO ORDER DEFENDANT TO FACE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION
There is another aspect of the judgment in Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) that needs consideration. The judgment on fundamental dishonesty was considered in the previous post. The defendant was unsuccessful in their appeal against the…
EXAGGERATION OF INJURIES IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: HIGH COURT DECISION
In Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) Mr Justice Jacobs rejected an appeal from a defendant that argued the trial judge should have found a claimant to be fundamentally dishonest. “The Defendant’s argument, based on the word…
PROVING THINGS 215: CLAIM £8.7 MILLION IN DAMAGES BUT RECOVER NOTHING: NOT SO MUCH A CASE OF EXPERT SHOPPING BUT EXPERTS ON SHOPPING CENTRES
We have looked before at the judgment of HHJ Hodge (sitting as a High Court judge) in Ahuja Investments Ltd v Victorygame Ltd & Anor (CONTRACT – Purchase of commercial investment property) [2021] EWHC 2382 (Ch). It is worth noting that…
FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS WIDOW’S CLAIM TO DAMAGES BASED ON “PRACTICAL REALITY”
In Paramount Shopfitting Company Ltd v Rix [2021] EWCA Civ 1172 the Court of Appeal rejected a defendant’s appeal in relation to the assessment of damages awarded to a widow. The widow’s husband had run a successful business. The fact that…
DEALING WITH THE COUNTER-SCHEDULE AND COUNTER-ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th JULY 2021
This webinar looks at the legal principles and arguments that can be used to reduce claims for personal injury damages. It is being held on the 16th July 2021 (and available as an on-demand recording to the 16th January 2022). …
WEBINAR ON PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES: 8th JULY 2021
On the 8th July 2021 I am presenting a webinar on Periodical Payments and Provisional Damages. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR This webinar looks at the law, practice and procedure relating to provisional damages and periodical payments…
FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES AND THE CHOUZA CASE (3): PAIN,SUFFERING AND SHOCK PRIOR TO DEATH
This is the third post in a detailed examination of the judgment in Chouza v Martins & Ors [2021] EWHC 1669 (QB). Here we look at the judgment in relation to the claim for pain and suffering prior to death. …
WEBINAR ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: ACCOMMODATION AND APPLIANCE CLAIMS: 30th JUNE 2021
On the 30th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on accommodation and appliance claims. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR Claims for accommodation and appliances are a major part of many serious claims. Here we look at the…
CARE CLAIMS IN PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 25th JUNE 2021
On the 25th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on Care Claims in personal injury actions. Booking details are available here. This webinar looks at claims for care, the law underpinning care and assistance claims, looking at practical…
LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIM: WEBINAR 18th JUNE 2021
On the 18th June 2021 I am presenting a webinar on loss of earnings claims. The material includes a client questionnaire in relation to loss of earnings and income. Booking details are available here. TOPICS COVERED BY THE…
AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: NO GREATER AMOUNT IF YOU ARE RICH: A BLAST FROM THE PAST (64 YEARS TO BE PRECISE)
Often this blog covers judgments on the day they were made. Today, however, we are going back 64 years to 1957 looking at the case of Dunhill -v- Lumby reported on the 1st February 1957 in the Times. WHY THIS…
MORE ON MULTIPLE INJURIES, THE TARIFF AND TEST CASES
Official Injuries Claims have issued a release explaining the approach to test cases and multiple injuries. This explains the collaborative approach being adopted to find test cases in claims where the injuries fall inside and outside the tariff scheme. “neither…
MULTIPLE INJURIES AND THE CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2018: CROSS-SECTOR WORKING GROUP WORKING ON IT
An earlier post dealt with the issues relating to multiple injuries in personal injury cases where a claimant suffered multiple injuries and some of those injuries are subject to the statutory tariff scheme whilst others are not. This is clearly…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: WEBINAR 10th JUNE 2021
A post yesterday highlighted the uncertainties and complexities in relation to awards for pain and suffering where a claimant suffered multiple injuries some inside and some outside the statutory tariff scheme. This highlights the need for lawyers to understand precisely…
HOW MUCH IS AN ARM AND A NECK? THE ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN MULTIPLE INJURY CASES AFTER THE CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2018
The “whiplash” element of Civil Liability Act 2018 comes into force on the 31st May 2021. This introduces fixed tariff sums for damages for pain and suffering in certain road traffic claims where there has been a “whiplash” injury. A…
ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IN “MODERN SLAVERY” CASES: EXEMPLARY AND OTHER DAMAGES CONSIDERED
In Balogh & Ors v Hick Lane Bedding Ltd [2021] EWHC 1140 (QB) Master Davison assessed damages for three claimants who were the victims of “modern slavery”. The judgment contains a helpful encapsulation of the principles involved together with three…
DEFENDANT FAILS TO BEAT CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER: PART 36 CONSEQUENCES HELD NOT TO APPLY: THE CONSEQUENCES OF SERVING EVIDENCE LATE
The judgment of Mr Justice Johnson in Head v The Culver Heating Co Ltd [2021] EWHC 1235 (QB) is one that is of profound interest to those involved in fatal accident litigation. I will be writing about the damages aspect…
OBJECTING TO EVIDENCE BEING ADMITTED CAUSES PROBLEMS ON APPEAL : CLAIMANT GETS BITTEN BY ITS OWN HORSE
In Lifestyle Equities C.V. & Anor v Ahmed & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 675 the Court of Appeal allowed, in part, an assessment against the assessment of damages. What is interesting here is the point that the claimants objection to…
A PERSON GIVING EVIDENCE AS TO EARNINGS AND PENSION MAY (OR MAY NOT) BE AN EXPERT: COURT CONSIDERS THE ISSUES
Returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Cavangh in TVZ & Ors v Manchester City Football Club Ltd [2021] EWHC 1179 (QB) the judge considered, but did not decide, whether statements from third parties as to earnings and pensions were…
BEREAVEMENT DAMAGES IN THE “DIS-UNITED” KINGDOM: THE “POSTCODE LOTTERY” FOLLOWING A FATAL ACCIDENT
The Association of Personal Injury lawyers made a presentation yesterday in relation to re-consideration of the law relating to bereavement damages in the UK. It point, in particular, to the differences between the law in England,Wales and Northern Irelan compared…
PROVING THINGS 209: SOLICITORS NEGLIGENCE ACTION DISMISSED BECAUSE THERE WAS NO LOSS: THE CLAIMED JEWEL WAS BIGGER THAN THE SOCKET
In Kingsley Napley LLP v Harris & Anor [2021] EWHC 901 (QB) Margaret Obi, sitting as a high court judge dismissed a claim for professional negligence on the basis that there had not been any loss. There are important lessons…
PROVING THINGS 208: IMPACT OF COVID MEANS THAT THE CLAIMANT HAS LOST NOTHING AND DEFENDANT GAIN NOTHING: NO AWARD FOR THE CLAIMANT’S “LOSSES”
The judgment of HHJ Hodge QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Wigan Borough Council v Scullindale Global Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 779 (Ch) has much of interest. The judge’s observation that “one of the particular pleasures of…
CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER TO ACCEPT 90% OF DAMAGES NOT EFFECTIVE WHEN CAUSATION IS IN ISSUE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
In the judgment today in Seabrook v Adam [2021] EWCA Civ 382 the Court of Appeal considered when a Part 36 offer to accept a reduced percentage on liability was effective when only causation was in dispute. It was held…
PROVING THINGS 205: COUNSEL NOT ENTITLED TO £6,922,532 IN FEES BUT WERE ENTITLED TO EXEMPLARY DAMAGES
In Cakebread & Anor v Fitzwilliam [2021] EWHC 472 (Comm) Sir Ross Cranston (sitting as a High Court judge) considered an argument from the claimant barristers that an arbitrator had erred in refusing to award them their fees. The essential…
DAMAGES AND THE SCHEDULE OF DAMAGES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 4th MARCH 2021
This webinar on the 4th March 2021 is part of the Avoiding Pitfalls series. It looks at rules and practice relating to drafting and proving damages in personal injury cases. The webinar considers schedules of damages and proving damages with…
DAMAGES AND LOSS OF EARNINGS DUE TO COVID: A MINOR REDUCTION IN INCOME FOUND
One of the things considered in the judgment in Kim v Lee [2021] EWHC 231 (QB) was whether the claimant would have suffered a reduction in income due to Covid in any event. This is likely to be a live…
AN INTERESTING CASE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: NO INTEREST AWARDED ON DAMAGES FOR MALICIOUS PROSECUTION AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT
In Rees v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2021] EWCA Civ 49 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision not to award interest on damages for damages for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office. THE CASE The claimant…
PROVING THINGS 200: ALL THE SERIES IN ONE PLACE: THE (VERY) EXPENSIVE COSTS OF FAILING TO THINK FULLY ABOUT EVIDENCE
There are now 200 posts in the “Proving Things” Series. These centre, usually, on a failure to establish matters at trial. Sometimes the failures are dramatic. In Marathon Asset Management LLP -v- Seddon [2017] EWHC 300 (Comm) i the claimants had…
PROVING THINGS 199: “THE BITTER TRUTH”: INNOCENT PARTIES MAY SUFFER NO LOSSES – AND RECEIVE NO DAMAGES
The judgment of Mr Stephen Houseman QC sitting as a Deputy High Court judge in YJB Port Ltd v M&A Pharmachem Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 42 (Ch) is another example of a party failing to prove it had suffered…
PROVING THINGS 197: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS IN A PANDEMIC: ACTUAL EARNINGS EXCEEDED POTENTIAL EARNINGS
Sicri v Associated Newspapers Ltd (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 3541 (QB) is an unusual case in many ways. There are issues that are sensitive and require careful consideration. However there are also observations about claiming loss of earnings and proving…
PROVING THINGS 193: THE POSSIBILITY OF THE DECEASED PERSON HAVING INCREASED EARNINGS AND “LOSS OF CHANCE” CONSIDERED IN A FATAL CASE
In many ways the judgment Young v Downey [2020] EWHC 3457 (QB) is an extraordinary case, involving a terrorist killing taking place in 1982. On the other hand it shows a principle of general application in the assessment of fatal…
PROVING THINGS 191: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (II): A CLIENT QUESTIONNAIRE
Here we return to the basic issue of proving loss of income. This often applies in personal injury action, but is an issue that can arise in several other types of litigation. We have a questionnaire on the single issue…
PROVING THINGS 190: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (1) : THE IMPORTANCE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT: THE QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD ASK
The basic task of proving damages, particularly elements such as loss of earnings and disability in the labour market, are often overlooked in witness statements prepared for trial, both in personal injury actions and other actions were loss of income…
DEFENDANT’S LIABLE TO PAY INJURED SOLDIER FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS AFTER HE HAS TO HANG UP HIS BOOTS
There is much that is interesting to read in the judgment of David Lock QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Constance v Ministry of Defence & Anor [2020] EWHC 3029 (QB). One interesting point is the defendant’s interesting,…
WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A COMMERCIAL SOLICITOR AND A PROFESSIONAL KICKBOXER? (THERE’S A WHOLE WEBINAR ABOUT THIS…)
What is the difference between a solicitor and a professional kickboxer? There are many answers to this – and I am certain that I am going to receive some interesting responses on social media. However, whatever the differences are, there…
PROVING THINGS 186: WHEN THE ONE WITNESS IN THE CASE HAD LITTLE KNOWLEDGE OF HOW THE FIGURES IN THE SCHEDULE HAD BEEN REACHED – THERE IS TROUBLE AHEAD…
In Crazy Bear Group Ltd v Patel & Anor [2020] EWHC 3023 (Ch) Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Jones (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) considered whether defendants in an action had proven that they had suffered damages…
You must be logged in to post a comment.