INTEREST WHERE THE CLAIM WAS OVER A PROLONGED PERIOD:JUDGMENT ACT RATE NO LONGER APPROPRIATE
There were many procedural issues in the Court of Appeal decision in Oyesanya -v- Mid-Yorkshire Hospital Trust [2015] EWCA Civ 1049. Some of them will be looked at in later posts. Here we look at the appropriate approach of the…
SETTING OFF INTEREST AGAINST AN INTERIM PAYMENT: A HIGH COURT DECISION
The judgment of Mrs Justice Cox in Manna -v- Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 2279 (QB) is a veritable goldmine for anyone who writes about civil procedure or personal injury damages. One of the, many, issues…
HIGHWAYMEN, EVIDENCE AND DAMAGES ALL ON THE MENU.
There are some interesting observations in the judgment of Mr Recorder Acton David QC in Luffeorm Limited -v- Kitsons LLP [2015] EWHC B10(QB). This illustrates some important issues in relation to evidence and the need to prove damages. “The Highwayman’s…
LITIGATION RISKS AND MITIGATION OF LOSS: "MEDIATION IS A JUDGMENT CALL": WHEN IS A REFUSAL TO MEDIATE REASONABLE?
The issue of whether a failure to mediate represented a failure to mitigate loss was considered by Judge Pelling QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Orientfield Holdings Ltd -v- Bird & Bird [2015] EWHC 1963 (Ch). “Having embarked…
IF YOU CAN'T PROVE IT YOU DON'T GET IT: CALLING EVIDENCE AT COURT TO PROVE A LOSS: A WORKING EXAMPLE
A party claiming damages must bring evidence to court to prove the losses it claims. This is a simple statement. However adducing evidence which actually proves the losses claimed often gives rise to difficulties in all spheres of litigation. The…
WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT HARM RATHER THAN HELP AND A FAILURE TO PROVE DAMAGES: A HIGH COURT CASE EXAMINED
In Re-Use Collections Limited -v- Sendall & May Glass Recycling Ltd [2014] EWHC 3852 (QB) H.H. Judge Davies made some important observations about drafting witness statements. It is positively unwise to “cross-reference” witness statements to the evidence of other witnesses…
EVIDENCE: PROVING DAMAGES AND INTEREST ON DAMAGES: YOU CAN'T SUGAR THE PILL AND HAVE TO PROVE THE LOSS
The final paragraphs of the judgment of Mr Justice Eder in Sugar Hut Group -v- AJ Insurance [2014] EWHC 3352 (Comm) has some important lessons on the need to adduce evidence to prove losses. It also contains a discussion of…
INTEREST AND COSTS WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: WATCHORN –v- JUPITER CONSIDERED
There have been relatively few cases dealing with the approach of the courts under the new Part 36 provisions when a claimant beats their own Part 36 offer at trial. The judgment of HH Judge Purle QC in Watchorn -v-…
CAPS ON DAMAGES AND PART 36: THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENTERPRISE COURT
Some interesting and important points of procedure were considered today by H.H. Judge Hacon in Abbot -v- Design & Display Ltd [2014] EWHC 3243 (IPEC). Firstly in relation to the rules of the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court and the damages…
SUCCESS FEES IN CHILDREN CASES: LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER PRACTICE
The question of deducting success fees from the damages of a child remains a vexed one. I am grateful to Gillian Shaw from Paul Rooney LLP Solicitors who sent me the following note in relation to the practice in Liverpool…
THE JUDGE, THE EXPERT, CAUSATION AND DAMAGES: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH WHEN THE DEFENDANT HAS MADE A BAD SITUATION WORSE
The decision of Foskett J in Reaney -v- University Hospital of North Staffordshire NHS Trust [2014] EWHC 2016 (QB) contains important observations on the role of the judge and the expert in assessing damages for care. It also contains a…
COSTS CLAIMED AS DAMAGES 2: THE CASE LAW IN DETAIL
I am grateful to P.J.Kirby Q.C. for responding to the previous post on costs claimed as damages. The situation is far more complex than the passage cited in the Rentokil case suggests. THE ISSUE P.J. asked whether the case of…
WHAT IS THE POSITION WHEN LEGAL COSTS ARE CLAIMED AS A HEAD OF DAMAGES?
The case of Rentokil Initial -v- Goodman Derrick LLP [2014] EWHC 2994 (Ch) was looked at in the previous post in relation to evidence. However it also raised an interesting issue as to the approach a court should take when a…
LITIGATION: EVIDENCE; MITIGATION OF LOSS AND "BLACK BOXES" IN THE EVIDENCE
The case of Rentokil Initial -v- Goodman Derrick LLP [2014] EWHC 2994 (Ch) contains some interesting observations on evidence. In particular what is the position when a party claims privilege and fails to disclose legal advice relating to a settlement…
NO SPECIFIC FORM OF WRITTEN NOTICE IS REQUIRED TO WITHDRAW A PART 36 OFFER: THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF LEAVING A PART 36 OFFER OPEN
Part 36 offers are relatively easy to withdraw. This is demonstrated by the decision of Flaux J in of Supergroup Plc v JustEnough Software Corp Inc where he rejected an application for a declaration that the the claimant had validly…
OFFERS TO SETTLE: COSTS, CONDUCT AND A WHOLE LOT MORE: REHILL –v- RIDER HOLDINGS CONSIDERED
The case of Rehill –v- Rider Holdings [2014] EWCA Civ 42 offers quite a few lessons for litigators and litigants. In relation to offers and filing schedules of costs and the risks of litigation for litigants and lawyers. REHILL –v- RIDER…
WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES IF THE CLAIMANT HAS JUDGMENT OR THE DEFENCE HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT?
One important aspect of the new rules about relief from sanctions is that they apply to defendants as well. A defendant who is late in adducing evidence can be debarred from calling evidence as in the Durrant case. Here we…
THANKS FOR THE £500,000. NOW WHERE’S THE EXTRA £50,000 YOU OWE ME? KNOWING THE RISKS AND ADVANTAGES FOR THE CLAIMANT IN THE NEW PART 36
The new provisions when a claimant beats their own Part 36 provide challenges (including potential negligence claims) for the claimant lawyer. A claimant who beats their own Part 36 offer at trial now obtains considerable benefit. CPR 36.13(3) states that…
You must be logged in to post a comment.