SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: WHAT CAN POSSIBLY GO WRONG? TEN SIMPLE POINTS TO MAKE LIFE EASIER & TO CAP OFF THE BANK HOLIDAY WEEKEND
Service of the claim form remain a major cause of problems. Here we re-cap (not for the first time) on the basic causes of many of the problems, with links through to the many posts on this subject. This post…
SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: CLAIMANT SURVIVES “BY THE SKIN OF THEIR TEETH”: SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS TO LEARN HERE
Every year brings its own crop of service of the claim form cases. This year is no different. In Oran Environmental Solutions Ltd & Anor v QBE Insurance (Europe) Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 1271 (Comm) Mrs Justice Cockerill observed…
MORE ON THE NEW RULES EXTENDING TIME: HOW DOES THE PRACTICE DIRECTION IMPACT ON THE RULES FOR EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE DEFENCE?
A very sensible question was asked on Twitter last week about whether the Practice Direction extending time applied to the very specific rule about parties agreeing an extension of time for filing the defence. THE RULES RELATING TO FILING A…
THE NEW PRACTICE DIRECTION: THE LIMITATIONS ON THE POWER TO EXTEND TIME BY AGREEMENT AND MAKING AN APPLICATION
Although it is welcome the new Practice direction is a bit disappointing. It does not trust litigators at all (or not very much). Parties can agree extensions of up to 56 days, without permission of the Court, but not beyond…
CORONAVIRUS – A USEFUL CASE: MASTER ALLOWS PARTY TO VARY DIRECTIONS BY CONSENT BY 56 DAYS
7BR’s website carries an interesting report from Adam Korn of a judgment today where Master Davison made an order extending the amount of time the parties can agree to vary directions. This was directly because of potential difficulties arising out…
OUT OF TIME APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF ITS UNDERLYING MERITS: DENTON CONSIDERED
For the second time in two days I am writing about a relief from sanctions case where the court took into account the merits of the underlying case. Yesterday relief was refused because the court held that the case had…
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – THE YEAR IN REVIEW (3): SANCTIONS AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OR NOT…)
Another certainty about writing about civil procedure is that every year will bring a batch of applications relating to sanctions and relief from sanctions. This year has been no different. We start off (from the end of last year) with…
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…
SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND THE “TRAP FOR THE UNWARY CLAIMANT”: THE TRAP OPERATED AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED
The judgment of Chief Master Marsh today in Maggistro-Contenta & Anor v O’Shea & Anor [2019] EWHC 3035 (Ch) is a prime example of difficulties being caused because of a mistake in relation to the rules relating to service. It…
STAGE 3 PROCEEDINGS AND LATE SERVICE OF EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
The judgment of the Court of Appeal yesterday in Wickes Building Supplies Ltd v Blair [2019] EWCA Civ 1934 is an important one in relation to late service of evidence and Stage 3 of the Protocol. It shows the importance…
PROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME (CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYERS DO NOT GET EXCITED)
Today seems a good day to consider prospective applications for extensions of time. These are going to figure in every litigators career at some point. A knowledge of the relevant law is essential. A prospective application of time is dealt…
DENTON APPLIED TO OUT OF TIME APPLICATION IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: THE APPLICANT STAYS IN JAIL
In Lakatamia v SU [2019] EWCA Civ 1626 the Court of Appeal refused an application for permission to appeal out of time in a case where the applicant had been committed to prison for contempt. “Hysaj establishes that the…
DEFENDANTS – WAKE UP, SERIOUSLY: A “VERY RELAXED” ATTITUDE TO THE RULES WILL COST YOUR CLIENTS DEAR: APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A DEFENCE REFUSED: REFUSAL CONFIRMED ON APPEAL
In Joan Angela Kember v (As Personal Representative of the Estate of Leonard John Kember, Deceased And On Her Own Behalf And On Behalf of His Dependants) [2019] EWHC 2297 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert upheld a refusal to grant a…
WHEN A JUDGE MAKES A WRONG DECISION BECAUSE RELEVANT PAPERS (WHICH HAVE BEEN SENT TO COURT IN GOOD TIME) HAVE NOT REACHED THEM
The decision in Singh v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 1504 related to a case where a decision was made when the judge was not given relevant papers that had arrived at court. “In…
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 11: PROCEDURE: AN EIGHT POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE
Here we have a short eight point guide on some of the key problem areas in relation to procedure once proceedings have been issued. Rule 1: Have everything ready pre-issue and have a plan. Effectively this means that you have,…
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT LITIGATORS KNOW HOW TO COMPUTE TIME PROPERLY: 7 DAYS MEANS 7 DAYS: APPLICATION TWO DAYS LATE: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF
In Evans v Pinsent Masons LLP [2019] EWHC 2150 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer overturned a decision granting relief from sanctions. A major issue arose out of confusion by the claimant’s solicitors over the calculation of the time period. This…
WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE TEST IF SOMEONE APPLIES IN ADVANCE TO EXTEND TIME TO COMPLY WITH A PEREMPTORY ORDER? HIGH COURT DECISION
In Everwarm Ltd v BN Rendering Ltd [2019] EWHC 2078 (TCC) Mr Alexander Nissen QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered the appropriate test to be applied when the court made a peremptory order and an application was…
AGREEMENTS TO EXTEND TIME : THEY CAN BE A GOOD THING – BUT MUST BE DONE PROPERLY
In Cowan v Foreman & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1336 the Court of Appeal were far more supportive of the idea that parties in Inheritance Act claims could agree a “limitation amnesty”. However an agreement has to be drafted with…
PROVING THINGS 160: DELAY MUST BE EXPLAINED: COURT CAN DIRECT THAT EXTRA EVIDENCE BE FILED
In Hendry v Hendry & Ors [2019] EWHC 1976 (Ch) Master Shuman refused the claimant’s application for an extension of time to bring proceedings under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. THE CASE The claimant was married…
WHY DEFENDANTS HAVE TO KNOW THE RULES ABOUT SERVICE AND JURISDICTION AND ACT PROMPTLY: YOU’LL FIND YOURSELVES MAKING AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS
The judgment today in Babcock Marine (Clyde) Ltd v HS Barrier Coatings Ltd [2019] EWHC 1659 (TCC) highlights the need for defendants to be prompt if they are making an application in relation to service or jurisdiction. CPR 11 gives…