DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLAIMANT’S DAMAGES: A DEDUCTION OF £2,500 REDUCED TO £330: THE WARNING NOTICE FROM THE SRA REITERATED IN A COURT JUDGMENT
The previous post mentioned a webinar this Friday on deducting costs from the client’s damages. Right on cue this judgment occurred on that very topic. It makes some very important observations. It has created more work in preparing the webinar,…
CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
A post yesterday highlighted both the significance of a claim for loss of earnings for a child claimant, but also the difficulty. In that case the award for disability in the labour market of £50,000 was higher than the award…
PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
Assessing claims for loss of earnings for children is always difficult. The importance of this has become, if anything, more acute given the Supreme Court decision in CCC (by her mother and litigation friend MMM) (Appellant) v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals…
“GUIDE, MENTOR AND FRIEND”: REVIEW OF THE APIL GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS 4th EDITION: STUART McKECHNIE KC (AND A FORMIDABLE TEAM): THE “LITTLE GEM” THAT KEEPS ON GIVING
The fundamental question for a reviewer of a legal text is – is this book worthwhile? Here there is only one answer. A book of considerable importance, assistance and utility is a “must buy”. HOW DO I SUMMARISE THIS? Sir…
PROVING THINGS 285: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: “IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH QOCS TO EXTEND IT TO CLAIMANTS WHO KNOWINGLY TELL UNTRUTHS ABOUT SOMETHING FUNDAMENTAL TO THEIR CLAIM…”
This is a judgment on fundamental dishonesty where the judge considers, in some detail, the burden of proof and what a defendant needs to establish. There are important observations about the burden of proof and consideration of the term “dishonesty”…
PROVING THINGS 283: FAILING TO ESTABLISH A CLAIM FOR PROVISIONAL DAMAGES FOR ONE SET OF SYMPTOMS BUT ESTABLISHING IT IN ANOTHER
There are relatively few judgments in which the law and practice relating to provisional damages are considered in detail. We have such a case here. Further it is an example of the claimant failing to establish provisional damages in relation…
PROVING THINGS 282: THE INJURED CLAIMANT ADDUCED NO EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE (SOMETHING ABOUT PLEADINGS TOO…)
Here we look at a Privy Council decision in a personal injury case. The claimant lost at first instance, the defendant having elected to call no evidence. What is interesting about this case is the constant motif in the judgment…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 6: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH CAUSATION: STATISTICAL RISK REDUCTION DOES NOT SATISFY THE BURDEN OF PROOF
Establishing causation is a key element of many clinical negligence cases. Here we have a case where the issue of causation was put in two ways: the “but for” test and alternatively the “indivisible injury” test. The claimant did not…
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 29th APRIL 2026
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Attersley v UK Insurance Ltd has sharpened the costs risks faced by claimants who accept a Part 36 offer outside the relevant period. While a claimant who accepts late remains subject to fixed recoverable costs…
CCC AND LOST YEARS IN THE SUPREME COURT: THE POTENTIAL STING IN THE TAIL FOR CLAIMANTS: “WAGES IN HEAVEN SHOULD NOT BE AWARDED WHEN THEY ARE NEEDED ON EARTH”
Here we are looking at some of the observations made by Lord Burrows in the recent judgment given by the Supreme Court. In the short term it is good news for seriously injured child claimants. However Lord Burrows has laid…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 57: A CASE ALLEGING PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE AGAINST A SOLICITOR WAS NOT ADEQUATELY PLEADED
We are looking at the same case as in the earlier post, but from a different angle. The case has some particular pleading points. The claimant pleaded that the solicitor was negligent in not instructing counsel, but did not plead that…
PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS: A SOLICITOR WAS NOT NEGLIGENT IN ADVISING THE CLAIMANT TO SETTLE: NEITHER COUNSEL’S ADVICE NOR AN EXPERT REPORT WERE NECESSARY
Fortunately for the courts and legal system most civil cases settle. Advising on settlement terms carries some risks, and requires a high level of judgment. Some clients will be dissatisfied with the settlement reached and blame the lawyers involved for…
FATAL ACCIDENTS WEBINAR SERIES 2026: ADVANCE NOTICE : JUNE – JULY 2026: BASIC PRINCIPLES AND SOME INTERESTING NEW DEVELOPMENTS CONSIDERED
The recent High Court decision in Denning v Stone [2025] EWHC 3517 (KB) is a powerful reminder of the very particular nature of fatal accident damages. Although the deceased’s farm was not making a profit, the court awarded £377,577 to…
LIMITATION IN ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSE CASES: THE COURT DECLINED TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION UNDER S.33 “THE DELAY HAS ALREADY SIGNIFICANTLY UNDERMINED THE COGENCY OF THE EVIDENCE ABOUT WHETHER THE ABUSE TOOK PLACE AT ALL”
Here we have a case where the court refused to exercise its discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act in relation to allegations of sexual abuse that took place in the 1980s. As the judgment notes this is an…
PROVING THINGS 281:THE CCC CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT: LOSS OF EARNINGS AND CHILDREN: “THE COURT MUST ASSESS DAMAGES AS BEST IT CAN ON SUCH EVIDENCE AS IS REASONABLY AVAILABLE”
One of the things that the judgment in CCC -v- Sheffield has done is to highlight the issues relating to proving loss of earnings claims in relation to children. Indeed this difficulty in establishing such losses was a major issue…
LOST YEARS DAMAGES AND THE CHILD CLAIMANT: JUDGMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT TODAY
The judgment of the Supreme Court today considered whether “lost years” damages should be awarded to a young child. The Court, by a majority, allowed the claimant’s appeal and held that damages should be awarded in these circumstances. This post…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 11: THE LOCAL AUTHORITY COULD NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PERSONAL INJURY TRUSTS AND REFUSE TO PROVIDE CARE
Here was have a case where the local authority ceased providing funds for a seriously injured person, indeed they demanded money back. The local authority contended that money in a personal injury trust should properly be taken into account. Further…
PROVING THINGS 278: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE THEIR CASE WHILST THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO PROVE FRAUD: MULTIPLE INCONSISTENCIES LEAD TO EVIDENCE NOT BEING ACCEPTED
Here we look at a judgment where the claimant failed to establish his case. The defendant also failed to prove that the claimant was involved in a “staged crash”. It shows how cumulative inconsistencies in a party’s evidence can lead…
DEFENDANTS GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE SERVED LATE: EVEN THOUGH THIS LED TO THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE TRIAL
A defendant that wishes to rely on surveillance evidence must choose its timing with extreme care. If the evidence is disclosed too early then the claimant could be “tipped off”; too late and this could be categorised as an “ambush”. …
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026
As regular readers of this site know procedural mistakes derail more civil claims than weak evidence or bad law. Missed deadlines, defective pleadings, non-compliance with court directions and costs failures can all result in serious sanctions — or the claim…
HIGH COURT SETS ASIDE AN ORDER MADE FOLLOWING AN APPLICATION WITHOUT NOTICE : THIS IS A REHEARING IN FULL – THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE TO SHOW AN ERROR SUCH AS TO WARRANT SETTING ASIDE THE ORIGINAL ORDER
Here we look at a case where the court set aside an order made without notice. The Master found that the evidence presented to him at the initial hearing was “neither full nor frank”. It is a reminder of the…
PROVING THINGS 277: FARMER’S WIDOW HAD SUFFERED A LOSS OF £55,000 A YEAR EVEN THOUGH THE FARM WAS NOT MAKING A PROFIT: AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED
Here we have an interesting example of the application of one of the important principles of Fatal Accident Act damages. When the deceased person was running a business, the business may continue to operate after the death. However the dependants…
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE
A perennial problem for litigators is the situation where a claimant has a good case but the Defendant is impecunious and uninsured. In many (but not all) motor claims the Motor Insurers Bureau will provide a practical remedy. In all…
PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 3: SO WHY DID THE CLAIMANT LOSE? PLUS – THE STING IN THE TAIL FOR DEFENDANTS…
Earlier posts have shown that the claimant was successful on two of the key issues in relation to the appeal. However litigation can be cruel. A litigant can win on many issues but still lose the case. So it is…
INTEREST RATE DECREASED ON THE COURT FUNDS OFFICE SPECIAL AND BASIC ACCOUNTS: THE AMOUNTS AND A REMINDER OF A USEFUL ONLINE TOOL
The interest rates payable on Court Fund accounts have decreased. THE CHANGES The changes are announced here. They took effect on the 9th January 2026. Special Account – decreased from 4.00% to 3.75% Basic Account – decreased from 3.00%…
COST BITES 314: PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT IN THE RTA PROTOCOL: CLAIMANT LIMITED TO FIXED COSTS
This is the second case today that was sent in by a helpful reader. I am grateful to Ben Millns from Kennedys who has sent me a copy of this judgment. It relates to the question of whether a personal…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 42: THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A “DENIAL”: DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE CASE WAS PLEADED
This is the first of two interesting cases today that have been sent in by readers. I am grateful to Rebecca McVety of the Dental Law Partnership for sending me this judgment which deals with pleadings, in particular the very…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 41: HAD THE DEFENDANT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY?
A party alleging fraud or dishonesty cannot “ambush” their opponent at trial. Fraud must be fully particularised and pleaded. Do identical principles apply to allegations of fundamental dishonesty? In this case the judge considered an argument that points in relation…
EXPERT WATCH 27 : WHAT DOES THE COURT DO WHEN AN EXPERT’S EXAMINATION HAS BEEN COVERTLY RECORDED? “I HOPE HE WILL NEVER DO IT AGAIN…”
Covert recordings, of one type or another, are featuring heavily on this blog today. Here we consider a case where a claimant secretly recorded her examination by an expert instructed by the defendant. The claimant then applied to admit the…
COST BITES 312: A CHANCE TO SEE COSTS BUDGETING IN ACTION: A CASE WHERE FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY IS ALLEGED AND THE CLAIMANT IS A PROTECTED PARTY
It is always interesting to read detailed decisions about costs budgeting. They are few and far between. We have a full judgment here where the Master deals with issues such as hourly rates, the impact of allegations of dishonesty and…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND ACCIDENTS AT WORK: WEBINAR 1ST DECEMBER 2025: CRITICISM USING HINDSIGHT IS EASY BUT DOES NOT NECESSARILY LEAD TO FINDINGS AGAINST A CLAIMANT
This webinar explores the complex area of contributory negligence in employer’s liability cases. It examines how courts approach allegations that an employee’s actions contributed to their own injury, drawing on key case law to illustrate judicial reasoning. Delegates will gain…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE IN ROAD TRAFFIC CASES: DO ALL ROADS LEAD TO FROOM? WEBINAR 19th NOVEMBER 2025
Issues relating to contributory negligence often play a large part in road traffic cases. This webinar looks at the case law and guidance in relation to the key issues that often arise. Booking details are available here. (A failure to wear…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE LAW, PRACTICE AND SPECIAL CASES: WEBINAR 17th NOVEMBER 2025
You may be reading this for the second time – but it may be partly your own fault.… This webinar looks at the law relating to contributory negligence, the legislation and the key cases. Booking details are available here. …
SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (3): ARE THE CPR PROVISIONS RELATING TO VULNERABILITY RELEVANT? WHOSE JOB IS IT TO CONSIDER THEM IN THIS CONTEXT?
We are looking again at the case in which the claimant applied for permission to withdraw their Part 36 offer. The claimant had capacity, however at the hearing it was argued that he came within the definition of “vulnerable” litigant…
SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (2): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED
We continue with the consideration of the recent case in which a claimant applied for permission to withdraw a Part 36 offer. The judge also considered the relevant rules and case law in detail. (You need the court’s permission to…
OCCUPIER’S LIABILITY CASES IN THE COURTS: A PRACTICAL APPROACH: WEBINAR 29th OCTOBER 2025
This webinar looks at how the courts are dealing with occupiers liability cases and the duty of care. It takes a practical look at they way in which cases are decided and the factors which determine whether liability is established…
COST BITES 298: SHOULD THE DEFENDANT PAY ALL THE COSTS WHEN THE CLAIMANT DISCONTINUED AGAINST OTHER DEFENDANTS
We are looking here at an issue relating to a defendant’s liability to pay the costs of other defendants against whom no order for costs was made. Was the “paying” defendant also liable to pay the costs that the claimant…
SHOULD COSTS BE DISAPPLIED IN A “MIXED” CASE WHERE PART OF A CLAIM HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT? A DECISION ON APPEAL
What order for costs should the court make in a “mixed” claim when part of the claim is struck out but a personal injury claim continues. That was the question considered in the appeal we are looking at here. In…
EXPERT WATCH 21: THE EXPERT WHO FAILED TO CONSIDER NEW EVIDENCE IN SUFFICIENT DETAIL AND “WHO WAS NOT PARTICULARLY OPEN TO RECONSIDERING HIS OPINION”
Here we look at a judgment about medical evidence in a personal injury action. The issue was one of causation – whether an earlier injury to the claimant’s leg “caused” a later decision to have that leg amputated. The critique…
SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE UNDER SCRUTINY, ADMISSIBILITY AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED: “THE PROVIDING OF PATENTLY UNTRUE WITNESS STATEMENTS TO THE COURT, ENDORSED WITH STATEMENTS OF TRUTH, IS A MATTER OF SERIOUS CONCERN TO THE COURT”
This is the most serious criticism of surveillance operatives as I have seen. The judge found that the operatives, filming on behalf of a defendant for the purpose of litigation, had been “fundamental and repeated” errors. The operatives then put…
COST BITES 294: “A DETAILED ASSESSMENT IS NOT THE FORUM TO RESCUE OR TO ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE EFFECT OF A POORLY WORDED ORDER”: THE COURT WOULD NOT CONSIDER ASSERTIONS OF POTENTIAL FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTYOF THE PRIMARY ACTION ON ASSESSMENT
Here we are looking at an attempt by a paying party defendant to raise issues of conduct, including potential fundamental dishonesty, at the assessment of costs stage. The defendant argued (or attempted to argue) that the costs judge should take…
EXPERT WATCH 14: THERE WERE “TOO MANY IMPONDERABLES” TO FORM A VIEW THAT THE INJURIES WOULD HAVE BEEN REDUCED IF A CAR HAD BEEN DRIVEN AT A LOWER SPEED
The judge in this case considered whether the medical evidence established that driving at a lower speed would have “significantly reduced” the injuries that the claimant suffered. This is often a difficult matter to prove. (The evidence on whether…
MEMBER NEWS: “ON DEMAND” CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF WEBINARS AVAILABLE TO WATCH AT A TIME AND PLACE TO SUIT YOU: WITH DISCOUNTS FOR CLB MEMBERS
Last week we looked at webinars coming up which may be of interest to CLB readers. CLB members can obtain a discount on these webinars. The same discount applies to webinars which are now available “on demand”. These webinars are…
LIABILITY FOR ACCIDENTS INVOLVING OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES: WEBINAR 3rd SEPTEMBER 2025
As recent events have shown the consequences of inadequate training, supervision and knowledge of those responsible for running outdoor activities can lead to major injuries and fatalities. The webinar looks at the case law, statutes and general guidance in relation…
EXPERT WATCH 11: EXPERT ASSERTS THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS MALINGERING BUT WOULDN’T TELL THE COURT ABOUT THE DETAILS OF THE TESTS THAT LED TO THAT CONCLUSION
We have seen some unusual conduct of experts on this site. However the case we look at today has elements that we have not looked at before. An expert carried out tests on the claimant and, as a result of…
AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2025 (1): LIMITATION IN PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS – HOW DOES ANYONE MISS A THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?
In an ideal world all personal injury limitation periods would be three years, and all other action six. However we do not live in an ideal world. The first, and most obvious, place to look at avoiding negligence claims is…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 10: WAS THIS CLAIM STATUTE BARRED?IF SO SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION UNDER SECTION 33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980?
Here we look at a decision in relation to limitation. The trial judge had to determine whether the claimant’s action was statute barred. If it was she then had to consider whether it was appropriate to exercise the court’s discretion…
EXPERT WATCH 10: CLAIMANT UNSUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL IN ATTEMPTING TO OVERTURN THE TRIAL JUDGE’S PREFERENCE FOR THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS: “THE IRREDUCIBLE FACT IS IS THAT THE JUDGE ACCEPTED THE EXPERT EVIDENCE OF THE RESPONDENT’S KEY WITNESS AND PREFERRED TO OVER THE EVIDENCE OF THE APPELLANT’S KEY EXPERT WITNESS”
There are relatively few cases where a party appeals on the basis that trial judge was wrong to accept the evidence of one party’s expert witness in preference to the other. There are even fewer cases where such an appeal…
COST BITES 266: WHAT DOES THE COURT DO IF THE COSTS ARE DISPROPORTIONAL AFTER A LINE BY LINE ASSESSMENT? A WORKING EXAMPLE
Here we look at a judgment relation to proportionality and the assessment of costs. The claimant’s costs had been substantially reduced after a three day assessment but the judge found that the total sum was still disproportional. The judge could…
EXPERT WATCH 8: “SCIENCE DOES NOT CHANGE” : EVIDENCE THAT WAS “UNIMPRESSIVE IN PARTS AND OF LITTLE ASSISTANCE TO THE COURT”
To end the week I am looking at another decision about expert witnesses (it has been a theme this week). This time we are looking at accident reconstruction experts. One expert was found wanting, the judge favoured the other. The…
You must be logged in to post a comment.