EXPERTS IN COURT: “TRESPASSING ON THE JUDICIAL FUNCTION” AND “SEEKING TO ADVOCATE” ON BEHALF OF PARTY: THIS RARELY ENDS WELL…
There is no shortage of posts on this blogs where judges are critical of expert witnesses. Today we look at another such case where the judge found the expert’s approach “concerning” and went on to state that the expert was…
PROVING THINGS 261: PROVING FUTURE INTENTIONS: AN INTENTION TO HAVE MEDICAL OPERATIONS CARRIED OUT PRIVATELY
Today we are looking at a case where the defendant appealed against a decision that the claimant could recover the future cost of medical treatment to be carried out on a private basis. Statute states that there is no duty…
COST BITES 240: THERE IS NOT A “CATCH 22” POSITION IN RELATION TO THE DRAFTING OF THESE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS
We are continuing to work through the results of one case in relation to the recoverability of success fees from a client’s damages. The claimants, seeking to challenge their former solicitors deduction of costs from their damages, argued that the…
AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: PROTECTING THE CLIENT AND PROTECTING YOURSELF: WEBINAR 29th MAY 2025
“We go back through your claim in fine detail and if we find that your previous solicitor wasn’t thorough enough and your claim was mishandled, we’ll squeeze out all the compensation that you’re entitled to, getting you more money, and…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 4: THE EMPLOYER WAS IN BREACH OF DUTY WHEN EMPLOYEE WAS INJURED CROSSING THE ROAD
Last week we looked at a case where someone was injured in their workplace, but there was no breach. Today we are looking a case where an employee was injured crossing the road and it was held that the employer…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 3: A SOLICITOR INJURED AT WORK FAILS TO ESTABLISH LIABILITY: A DOOR IS NOT WORK EQUIPMENT
The question of what is work equipment can be a fairly fundamental one for personal injury lawyers. There can still be something akin to strict liability under the provisions of the Employer’s Liability (Defective Equipment) Act 1969. Here we consider…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 2: CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE, CAUSATION, EVIDENCE AND FAILURE TO WEAR A CYCLE HELMET (SOMETHING ABOUT PLEADINGS TOO)
In the previous post in this series I mentioned that there was a backlog. I didn’t anticipate that I would be looking at a case that was decided in 2009. However the judgment has recently arrived on BAILLI and it…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 1: WHAT DISCOUNT SHOULD BE GIVEN WHEN CARE IS PROVIDED GRATUIOUSLY ? THE COURT REVIEWS THE “STANDARD APPROACH”
For a while now I have planned a series that gives a focal point to the many cases and examples that arise, and are sent to me, in relation to personal injury matters. Many people offer help but the procedural…
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 21st MAY 2025
A defendant is entitled to make a Part 36 offer whenever it wants. The making of an early offer can cause major problems for claimants and their lawyers. An understanding of the rules, the relevant cases and the steps that…
AVOIDING PROBLEMS WITH CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: A WEBINAR (& CHECKLIST): 14th MAY 2025
There are many ways in which a court can approach a claim for loss of earnings. There are as many ways in which a claim for loss of earnings can go wrong. In recent weeks I have written about cases…
DEDUCTIONS OF INSURANCE PAYMENTS FROM PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: TWO RECENT CASES CONSIDERED: A POINT FOR BOTH CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS TO WATCH
The principle that insurance payments are sometimes deducted from a claim for personal injury damages is overlooked. Here we are looking at two recent cases where this principle was considered and applied. In one case, at least, the principle does not…
JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: IT IS “INCOHERENT” AND OBSTRUCTS THE JUST DISPOSAL OF THE CLAIM
It is an easy matter for a claimant to insert a claim for a substantial loss of earnings into a schedule of damages. However a claimant then has to prove that loss. Further, even prior to trial, a defendant is…
DEALING WITH THE COUNTER-SCHEDULE AND THE DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO DAMAGES: WEBINAR 7th MAY 2025
Much of the task of the claimant lawyer concentrates on the task of building up the claim for damages to ensure proper compensation. However it is essential that the lawyer if fully aware of the arguments, case law and principles…
COST BITES 232: COSTS JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT THERE SHOULD BE A “SHORT CUT” TO APPROVAL OF SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS FROM A PROTECTED PARTY’S DAMAGES
A solicitor who wishes to deduct “solicitor and own client” costs in a case involving a minor or protected party requires approval by the Court. Here we have a case where the claimant’s solicitors argued, robustly, that the current process…
LIABILITY FOR ACCIDENTS INVOLVING OUTDOOR PURSUITS: WEBINAR 3rd SEPTEMBER 2025
As recent events have shown the consequences of proper training, supervision and knowledge of those responsible for running outdoor activities lead to major injuries and fatalities. This webinar considers the key issues and cases on the topic. Booking details are…
CLAIMANT’S CLAIM AGAINST INSURER FAILS: THE INSURED’S FAILURE TO NOTIFY WAS A CONDITION PRECEDENT
Today we are looking at a case where the court considered the impact of The Third Party (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010 in detail. The court decided that the insurer was not liable to indemnify a claimant who had been…
COST BITES 229: THE CORRECT WAY OF CALCULATING A SUCCESS FEE IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: THE SOLICITOR DOES NOT HAVE AN AUTOMATIC ENTITLEMENT TO 25% OF THE DAMAGES
The calculation of a “success fee” in a personal injury action is a subject that has been the subject of several cases over the years. The issues were considered by District Judge Lumb in SJ (a minor suing by his mother…
ADDING AN ADDITIONAL PARTY TO A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD: THE TEST IS THAT OF DESIRABILITY RATHER THAN NECESSITY
In Doroudvash v Zurich Insurance PLC [2025] EWCC 10 HHJ Holmes identified a route whereby the claimant in a personal injury case could join an additional defendant into an action after the expiry of the initial limitation period. This construction…
RECENT CASES ON LOSS OF EARNINGS: WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THEM? WEBINAR 23rd APRIL 2025
Practitioners can learn a lot from looking at judgments on claims for loss of earnings. These provide a practical grounding of how the courts approach such claims and, in particular, how judges consider the evidence (or absence of evidence) in…
THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE OVERRIDDEN THE EVIDENCE OF THE (UNCHALLENGED) EXPERT WITNESS: CLAIMANT WAS ENTITLED TO DAMAGES FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY
In Sarah Jane Young v John Anthony Downey [2025] EWCA Civ 177 the Court of Appeal sent out another reminder that there are difficulties in trial judges attempting to override the views of expert witnesses. “… in the circumstances…
CLAIMANT ENTITLED TO COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AFTER LATE ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER: EVEN THOUGH FIXED COSTS APPLIED AT THE TIME THE OFFER WAS MADE
NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN Attersley v UK Insurance Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 217 I am grateful to barrister Thomas Mason for drawing my attention to the judgment today in Laura Attersley v UK…
SPORTING INJURIES IN THE COURTS: WEBINAR 17TH APRIL 2025: SOME INTERESTING TOPICS TO TACKLE…
Injuries to those involved in sports are not unusual. The issues relating to whether injuries are the result of negligence are complex ones. This webinar looks at the law relating to sporting injuries and, importantly, at the practical issues that…
ACCOMMODATION AND APPLIANCE CLAIMS: THE CASES SINCE SWIFT -v- CARPENTER: WEBINAR 15th APRIL 2025
Issues relating to accommodation costs and aids and appliances feature in many moderate to serious personal injury cases. There are relatively few cases where the principles governing damages are considered. This webinar looks at the principles and the practical steps…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN, SUFFERING AND LOSS OF AMENITY: RECENT CASES AND LESSONS TO LEARN FROM THEM: WEBINAR 8th APRIL 2025
Awards for pain and suffering are made in every personal injury case. However the law and principles relating to these awards are rarely considered by practitioners. This webinar takes a close look at recent awards to enable practitioners to know,…
NOW HERE’S AN UNUSUAL APPLICATION: COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION TO APPROVE A SETTLEMENT REACHED WITH A CLAIMANT – WHO HAD CAPACITY
In David Forsyth v Craig Howson & Anor [2025] EWHC 653 (KB) HHJ Claire Evans (sitting as Judge of the High Court) refused an unusual application by the defendants. The claimant had capacity to litigate and yet the defendants sought an order…
PROVING DAMAGES – THE CLAIMANT LAWYER’S BASIC TASK: WEBINAR 19th MARCH 2025
The “Proving Things” series on this blog is now up to number 256. The vast majority of this series is, in fact, about not proving things. That is where litigants fail to bring sufficient (sometimes any) evidence to court to prove…
SERIES OF 10 WEBINARS ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: AND YOU CAN BUY A “SEASON TICKET”
The APIL Damages Series is 10 webinars looking at key elements of law and practice relating to personal injury damages. The webinars can be bought and watched individually. APIL has a special offer for all 10, details available here. …
COST BITES 220: QOCS PROTECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO CO-CLAIMANTS WHO DO NOT BRING A CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURY: NOR DOES IT APPLY WHEN A CASE IS STRUCK OUT
In BB & Ors v Khayyat & Ors [2025] EWHC 443 (KB) Mr Justice Soole rejected an argument that claimants who had not brought an action for personal injury could have the benefit of QOCS protection. The fact that they…
PROVING THINGS 256: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH LIABILITY AFTER FALLING FROM A HORSE: THE ANIMALS ACT CONSIDERED
This blog has looked at the judgment in Boyd v Hughes [2025] EWHC 435 (KB) several times in relation to procedural issues and assertions of dishonesty. However the case, ultimately, was about a claimant who was injured when she fell…
THIS CASE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ISSUED IN CARDIFF; HEARD IN THE COUNTY COURT AND THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN A SPLIT TRIAL: HIGH COURT ISSUES A WARNING
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Boyd v Hughes [2025] EWHC 435 (KB). At the conclusion of the judgment there is a very clear warning that this case: (i) should not have been issued in the…
DISHONEST EXAGGERATION WAS NOT SUFFICIENTLY SIGNIFICANT TO AMOUNT TO FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: THIS WAS DISHONEST EMBELLISHMENT TO UNDERPIN AN ESSENTIALLY HONEST CLAIM
In Boyd v Hughes [2025] EWHC 435 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter decided, by the very narrowest of margins, that the claimant’s deliberate exaggeration of her claim did not amount to fundamental dishonesty. There was some exaggeration of the effect…
FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AT TRIAL OVERTURNED ON APPEAL: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS WRONG TO RELY ON AN INJURY THAT DID NOT FORM PART OF THE CLAIMANT’S PLEADED CASE
I am grateful to Express Solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHK Baddeley in Robinson -v- UK Insurance Limited, a note that case and of the judgment is available here -Robinson word . HHJ Baddeley was…
APPLICATIONS FOR ANONYMITY ORDERS IN CIVIL CASES INVOLVING CHILDREN: COURT OF APPEAL ADJOURNS HEARING – BUT WHERE ARE WE NOW?
In PMC (a child) v A Local Health Board [2025] EWCA Civ 176 the Court of Appeal adjourned a hearing relating to anonymity orders in civil cases involving children, pending a Supreme Court decision. Some important guidance was given as…
THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LAW OF LIMITATION AND CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE: DOES THIS GIVE RISE TO A PRACTICAL PROBLEM FOR PRACTITIONERS AND VICTIMS?
In a webinar on limitation tomorrow I am considering, among many other issues, the government’s proposals on changes to limitation in child sexual abuse cases. In particular whether there is a practical dilemma for practitioners with actions that are pending. …
AVOIDING LIMITATION PROBLEMS AND MAKING AN EFFECTIVE SECTION 33 APPLICATION: WEBINAR 20th FEBRUARY 2025
Limitation issues feature regularly on this blog and are a major reason for litigators being sued. This webinar looks at the major problem areas in limitation for personal injury and clinical negligence litigators. It identifies, and helps litigators avoid, all…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AND “WITHOUT PREJUDICE” CORRESPONDENCE: JUDGE HOLDS THAT CLAIMANT’S OFFER OF SETTLEMENT WAS ADMISSIBLE
In Morris v Williams [2025] EWHC 218 (KB) District Judge Dodsworth considered the question of whether a letter from the claimant’s former solicitor, which contained proposals by the claimant to settle allegations of fundamental dishonesty, could be adduced as evidence. …
COST BITES 213: HOW DOES THE COURT APPROACH ASSESSMENT WHEN COSTS ARE DEDUCTED FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES
We are returning, for the final post (for the time being at least) to the judgment of Cost Judge Rowley in Perrett v Wolferstans LLP [2025] EWHC 68 (SCCO). The judge considered the question of how the costs should be…
INSURER FAILS IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AFTER A COURT HAD EARLIER MADE FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY TO THE CRIMINAL STANDARD: MANY TROUBLING THINGS HERE
In Aviva Insurance Ltd v Nadeem & Anor [2024] EWHC 3445 (KB) HHJ Tindal (sitting as Judge of the High Court) dismissed an action for committal against someone who had been found to be fundamentally dishonest at a personal injury…
COST BITES 212: ARGUMENTS ABOUT DEDUCTIONS OF COSTS FROM CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT 2015 AND THE SRA CODE OF CONDUCT
We are again returning to the judgment of Cost Judge Rowley in Perrett v Wolferstans LLP [2025] EWHC 68 (SCCO). Here we examine the claimant’s (former client’s) arguments in relation to the deduction of costs breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015…
EXTRAORDINARY CONDUCT WHICH LED TO SOLICITOR’S UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM A PROTECT PARTY’S DAMAGES: JUDGMENT FROM THE SCCO
In AKS v National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd [2025] EWHC 126 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard recounted an extraordinary set of facts where a solicitor had wrongly deducted sums from their client’s damages. The judgment shows that this issue…
THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: MAXIMISING COSTS RECOVERY ON AN INTER PARTIES RECOVER – THE LITIGATOR’S ROLE: WEBINAR 23rd JANUARY 2025
Detailed assessment usually takes place after attempts at settlement of costs have failed and there are some major differences between the parties. The webinar uses examples from reported cases to show where failures and omissions by the receiving party has…
CAN A CLAIMANT WHO HAS ISSUED PART 8 PROCEEDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF AN INTERIM PAYMENT BE COMPELLED TO TRANSFER THE ACTION TO PART 7: THE COURT THINKS NOT
I am grateful to Chris Barnes KC for allowing me to rely on his note of a post he put on LinkedIn yesterday. It relates to the question of whether a court can “convert” Part 8 proceedings issued for the…
OGDEN TABLES UPDATED TO INCLUDE + 0.5% RATE
An updated set of Additional Tables have been added to The Ogden Tables today to include the 0.5% rate that came into force in January. THE UPDATES The updates can be found on this link. … Enjoying this post? Become a…
CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF IN 2024: SOME FACTS AND FIGURES
As 2024 draws to a close this is a good time to look back at the year in terms of civil procedure. There have been 463 posts to date this year amounting to 938 thousand words (I haven’t counted them…
A CLAIM FOR WORKING 24.4 HOURS A DAY – EVERY DAY OF THE YEAR: WHEN DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES ARE LEFT TO THE CLAIMANTS: PROFOUND PROBLEMS FOLLOW
We are returning to the judgment in Samrai & Ors v Kalia [2024] EWHC 3143 (KB). It is interesting to isolate out the parts of the judgment relating to the drafting of the schedules. The claimants’ schedules were found to…
68 YEARS AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESS: THE 15TH EDITION OF MUNKMAN (& EXALL) ON DAMAGES:A LOOK AT THE PAST EDITIONS AND WHAT WE CAN LEARN
The latest edition of what, used to be called, Munkman on Damages is now hot off the press. This is the 15th edition, the first being written in 1956. Now called Munkman and Exall on Damages for Personal Injury and…
COURT GIVES SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT EMPLOYER IN COVID 19 CASES: SAYING “SOMETHING WILL TURN UP” IS NOT SUFFICIENT
NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL SEE Mark Edwards & Ors v 2 Sisters Food Group Limited [2025] EWHC 1312 (KB) AND THE DISCUSSION ON THIS BLOG HERE In Edwards & Ors v 2 Sisters Food Group Ltd [2024] EWCC 21…
ANOTHER (WELL HIDDEN) CHANGE IN THE SPECIAL ACCOUNT RATE: REDUCED TO 4.75%
I am grateful to Barrister Matthew White for pointing out that the Courts Funds Office has reduced the special account rate from 5% to 4.75% from 6/12/24. MATHEW’S SPECIAL DAMAGES INTEREST CALCULATOR Mathew’s special damages interest calculator reflects the change….
AN EXPERT WHO “HAD NO REGARD TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTION” AND “WHO WAS PREPARED MATERIALLY TO MISLEAD THE COURT”
In Rashpal Samrai & Ors v Rajinder Kalia [2024] EWHC 3143 (KB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer made extremely trenchant findings about the conduct of an expert witness instructed on behalf of the claimants. There was no compliance with Rules or Guidance for…
PROVING THINGS 253: PROVING FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN SOMEONE HAS NOT YET ENTERED THE LABOUR MARKET
In Amadu-Abdullah v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2024] EWHC 3162 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie considered the correct way of assessing damages for future loss of earnings when the claimant has not yet entered the labour market. He…
You must be logged in to post a comment.