THE KEY CASES IN FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES: WEBINAR 19TH APRIL 2024
The means of assessment of fatal accident damages is not set out in the Fatal Accident Act, but is set out in case law. A knowledge of the case law is essential to all those involved in fatal accident litigation. …
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: “SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE” CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In the judgment given today in Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC 806 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie dismissed the claimant’s claim as being fundamentally dishonest. The judgment contains a detailed consideration of the issues relating to the…
SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT TODAY: WHIPLASH TARIFF INJURIES AND COMMON LAW DAMAGES: HOW SHOULD THE COURT DEAL WITH “MIXED” CLAIMS
In Hassam & Anor v Rabot & Anor [2024] UKSC 11 the Supreme Court rejected the defendant’s appeal against the way in which damages are assessed. It upheld the the majority view of the Court of Appeal that the Civil…
ISSUES OF CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: ONE BAD DECISION, NOT THREE POOR ONES
There is an interesting discussion on the principles of contributory negligence in the judgment of HHJ Keyser KC in Owens v Lewis [2024] EWHC 609 (KB). “(1) Where any person suffers damage as the result partly of his own…
DEALING WITH THE COUNTER-SCHEDULE AND COUNTER ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO DAMAGES: WEBINAR 14th MARCH 2024
This webinar on the 14th March 2024 takes a detailed look at those issues and arguments that are often marshalled to reduce a claim for personal injury damages. It enables practitioners to consider those matters that impact upon a claimant. …
WEBINAR ON PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES: RECENT CASES AND THE BASIC PRINCIPLES REVISITED: 19th FEBRUARY 2024
This webinar looks at recent cases in relation to periodical payments and periodical payments, including an interesting negligence case brought against solicitors who failed to claim provisional damages. It then looks at the law, practice and procedure relating to provisional…
ACCOMMODATION AND APPLIANCE CLAIMS – WEBINAR 15th FEBRUARY 2024
A webinar on the 15th February looks at accommodation and appliance claims in personal injury cases. Booking details are available here. THE WEBINAR Claims for accommodation and appliances are a major part of many serious claims. Here…
DAMAGES FOR CARE: RECENT CASES AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE FOR PRACTITIONERS: WEBINAR 8th FEBRUARY 2024
This webinar look at claims for care, the law underpinning care and assistance claims, looking at practical ways of preparing the case and presenting the schedule and cover. The webinar covers, in particular, the cases and observations made in recent…
DAMAGES FOR THE SELF EMPLOYED AND THOSE INVOLVED IN ENTERTAINMENT AND SPORT: WEBINAR 25th JANUARY 2024
On the 24th January there is a webinar looking at claims for damages for self-employed people. It also looks at the issues relating to losses, particularly loss of earnings, caused by those involved in sports and entertainment (it also looks…
QOCS: CLAIMS FOR £1 IN DAMAGES AND NOMINAL DAMAGES STILL HAVE QOCS PROTECTION
In Clark & Ors v Adams & Anor [2024] EWHC 62 (KB) Mr Justice Soole determined that claims for £1 in damages and for “vindicatory purposes only” still have the protection of QOCS. The size of the claim and the…
DAMAGES FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY AFTER SEEING A DEATH : SOME IMPORTANT POINTS CLARIFIED BY THE SUPREME COURT
The judgment of the Supreme Court in Paul & Anor v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2024] UKSC 1 will be the subject of detailed scrutiny by practitioners and academics for years to come. It is an action where the claimants…
DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: WEBINAR 18th JANUARY 2024
An injured claimant is often most concerned about their ability to earn their living. This webinar looks at the essential elements of a claim for loss of earnings. It looks at recent cases to illustrate in a practical way how…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: WEBINAR 11th JANUARY: PART OF THE DAMAGES SERIES 2024
On the 11th January 2024 I am presenting a webinar on Damages for pain and suffering. This is a part of a series of webinars looking at the basic elements of major heads of damages for personal injury, with a…
A CLAIMANT, ALLEGING FRAUD, IS NOT ENTITLED TO DELIBERATELY BREACH A COURT ORDER AND THE RULES OF COURT: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT GIVES LITIGATORS MUCH TO THINK ABOUT
Those who draft pleadings, particularly those alleging fraud and misconduct, have much to learn from the judgment of Mr Justice Johnson in AXA Insurance UK PLC v Kryeziu & Ors [2023] EWHC 3233 (KB). The fact that a party is…
SERIES OF WEBINARS ON DAMAGES: AVAILABLE AS A “BUNDLE” – OR ONE AT A TIME…
Next year I am presenting a series of eight webinars on personal injury damages. APIL is offering these as one off webinars, or the whole series can be subscribed to as a “bundle”. Booking details are available here. THE…
COST BITES 124 : EARLY VIEW AS TO VALUE OF A PERSONAL INJURY CASE WAS NOT UNREASONABLE: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL DISMISSED
I am grateful to solicitor John McQuater for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Sadiq in Drury -v- Yorkshire Aggregates Limited (a decision made in January this year, but the transcript has only just become available). It…
COURT REFUSES TO GRANT AN ORDER FOR A GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: INCORRECT PROCEDURE; COSTS AND “WHACK -A-MOLE” CONSIDERED
Several kind people have sent me a copy of the decision in Abbott & Ors v Ministry of Defence [2023] EWHC 2839 (KB). This is an unusual case because, despite the claimant and defendant being in agreement, the court did…
COST BITES 120: QOCS AND HIRE CHARGES: DECISION THAT CLAIMANT SHOULD PAY COSTS OUTSIDE QOCS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL
In Amjad v UK Insurance Ltd [2023] EWHC 2832 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie overturned a decision that the QOCS cap should be lifted in relation to a claimant who had failed to beat the defendant’s Part 36 offer and who…
COST BITES 119: COSTS BUDGETING: DEFENDANT ALLOWED TO VARY ITS BUDGET TO INCLUDE COSTS ALREADY INCURRED OBTAINING SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE
There is a report of an interesting decision of Master McCloud in Yelland -v- Space Engineering Services Ltd [2023] EWHC 2823 (KB). The report is from Sean Linley of Carter Burnett and can be read here. There is a link to…
COST BITES 114: LOOKING AT DETAILED ASSESSMENTS (3): SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: THEY HAVE NOT BEEN DRAFTED SYSTEMATICALLY, OR WITH PROPER CARE AND ATTENTION
We are continuing with the series where we look closely at what can happen at a detailed assessment and return to the judgment of Cost Judge James in HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO). The judge…
WEBINARS ON DAMAGES IN 2024: SOMETHING TO WARM UP THE WINTER DAYS EARLY IN THE NEW YEAR…
Early next year I am presenting a series of eight webinars on personal injury damages. The series looks at the major heads of damages for personal injury and clinical negligence cases, with a particular emphasis on those claims in the…
WEBINAR ON DRAFTING SCHEDULES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: 9th NOVEMBER 2023
I am presenting a webinar on drafting Schedules on the 9th November 2023. Booking details are available here. “In the event, the Original Schedules of Loss were shown to be quite unreliable and, in many respects, bore little or no relation…
MESSAGE FROM THE DESIGNATED CIVIL JUDGE IN MANCHESTER: STAFF REDUCTIONS IN THE COURTS HAVE CONSEQUENCES: PRACTICAL POINTS TO HELP
It is a sign of the times when the Designated Civil Judge sends out a message dealing with pressures on the Court, and staff in particular. Manchester Law Society has a “Message from the Designated Civil Judge” in which the…
SECTION 33 APPLICATION IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: THE SINS OF THE SOLICITORS WERE NOT VISITED UPON THE CLAIMANT: ACTION ALLOWED TO PROCEED WHEN IT WAS 5 1/2 YEARS OUT OF TIME
We looked at the judgment in Shaw v Maguire (Re Preliminary Issues) [2023] EWHC 2155 (KB) in an earlier post where Master Cook held that the court had a discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 in a fatal…
FATAL ACCIDENTS AND LIMITATION: THERE IS NO BAR TO SECTION 33 BEING USED IF THE LIMITATION PERIOD EXPIRED PRIOR TO DECEASED PERSON’S DEATH
In Shaw v Maguire (Re Preliminary Issues) [2023] EWHC 2155 (KB) Master Cook considered an issue relating to limitation, Section 33 and fatal accident claims. Can a claimant rely on Section 33 in circumstances where the limitation period had expired…
TWELVE KEY POINTS FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS ABOUT BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY (AND A PLUG FOR A WEBINAR)
I still see, on a fairly regular basis, problems caused in personal injury cases where a claimant is bankrupt and has failed to tell their lawyers. Equally often there are cases where it is clear that a claimant is, or…
TRIAL JUDGE’S FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY OVERTURNED: BECAUSE THE DISHONESTY WAS NOT “FUNDAMENTAL”
In Denzil v Mohammed & Anor [2023] EWHC 2077 (KB) Mr Justice Freedman overturned a finding by a trial judge that a claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. The finding that a minor head injury which was not part of the…
DEFENDANT NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO ENFORCE COSTS IN A CASE WHERE THERE WAS A “MIXED CLAIM”
I am grateful to Kevin Donoghue from Donoghue solicitors for bringing my attention to the judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Afriyie v Commissioner of Police for the City of London (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 1974 (KB). It is a…
EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS SHOULD BE SCRUTINISED AND NOT SIMPLY TRANSPOSED INTO SCHEDULES: “A CARE EXPERT SHOULD BE ABLE TO FULLY JUSTIFY ANY ASPECT OF CARE… WHICH THE COURT IS BEING ADVISED SHOULD BE PROVIDED”
In Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter sent out another warning about the inadequate state of expert reports. Here we look at the judgment in relation to the care experts. (A copy of…
ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FAILED: MANY OF THE ASSERTIONS DID NOT GO “TO THE HEART OF THE CLAIM”
In Afriyie v Commissioner of Police for the City of London [2023] EWHC 1632 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill rejected the defendant’s twelve allegations of fundamental dishonesty made against a claimant. Some of the assertions were rejected because they did not…
WHAT HAPPENS TO INTEREST WHEN A DEFENDANT ACCEPTS A CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER LATE? HIGH COURT DECISION
In MGS v University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 1547 (KB) Dexter Dias (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) rejected an argument that interest should run at 8% following the defendant’s late acceptance of the claimant’s…
PROVING THINGS 229: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE CERTAIN HEADS OF DAMAGES: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Lal v Reeder [2023] EWHC 1437 (KB) is a classic example of a failure to prove things. The trial judge found that the claimant had failed to establish certain heads of damage. That…
ON THIS BLOG 10 YEARS AGO: PART 36; INTERIM PAYMENTS AND SUING THE “MAN OF STRAW”
Now that the blog is 10 years (and 2 days) old it gives me an opportunity to look back at previous posts in a way that remains useful. Some (but not all) of the posts over the past decade stand…
3,450 CLAIMANTS CAN USE THE SAME CLAIM FORM: DIVISIONAL COURT DECISION ON CPR 7.3.
I am grateful to David Platt KC for sending me a copy of the decision of the Divisional Court in Abbott -v- Ministry of Defence [2023] EWHC 1475 (KB). The Court overturned a previous decision of a Master and allowed…
CLAIMANT’S CONVENTION CLAIM DISMISSED FOLLOWING ATTEMPT TO AMEND AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD
I am grateful to Barrister Katherine Howells for sending me a copy of the judgment in Hallett -v- TUI Airways Limited, a copy of which is available here Approved Judgment Hallett v TUI Airways Limited. The case deals with the…
INFLATION TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN ASSESSING DAMAGES USING THE JUDICIAL COLLEGE GUIDELINES
In Blair v Jaber [2023] EW Misc 3 (CC) Recorder Jack considered the issue of whether the court should take into account inflation when looking at the Judicial College Guidelines. The Recorder held that it should. …
COST BITES 90: CLAIMANTS LIABLE TO PAY 5% OF DEFENDANT’S COSTS: HUMAN RIGHTS, PERSONAL INJURIES AND “MIXED CLAIMS”
In ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Ors, Re Costs [2023] EWHC 1337 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill considered the liability of the claimants to pay costs in a “mixed claim” which was, primarily, a personal injury claim. She…
PROVING THINGS 226: PROVING CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE (AND A WEBINAR ON THAT VERY SUBJECT…)
There is often very little attention paid to judgments in relation to contributory negligence. Commentators tend to concentrate, on the whole, on primary liability. If considered at all contributory negligence is often an after thought – a “finding on the…
THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO STRIKE OUT A PROPERLY PLEADED CLAIM IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: JUDGE’S SHOULD BE ASTUTE TO DEAL WITH APPLICATIONS TO STRIKE OUT WHICH ARE, IN REALITY, APPLICATIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The judgment of Mr Justice Choudhury in Kasongo v CRBE Ltd & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 557 demonstrates the danger when a defendant makes an application to strike out a statement of case. The judge allowed an appeal where a…
PROVING THINGS 255: HEARSAY NOTICE FROM AN ANONYMOUS CALLER HELPED DETERMINE KEY FINDINGS IN A CIVIL CASE: JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF THE CLAIMANT
The judgment of Her Honour Judge Howells (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in Brown & Anor v Sestras & Ors [2023] EWHC 1220 (KB) is an interesting example of the use of hearsay, indeed anonymous evidence. An unknown…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: LEARNING FROM RECENT CASES: WEBINAR 5th JUNE 2023
Contributory negligence is one of those issues that play a daily part of the life of the personal injury practitioner. The basic principles underlying findings of contributory negligence are rarely explored, however these can have profound practical implications for the…
INTEREST ON DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURY CANNOT BE USED AS A MEANS OF PENALISING A DEFENDANT FOR POOR BEHAVIOUR: PART 36 ISSUES ALSO CONSIDERED
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Smout v Wulfrun Hotels Ltd [2023] EWHC 1128 (KB) considers the question of the use of interest as a penalty for the poor conduct of a defendant. The judge held that interest should…
CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO CONTINUE WITH THIRD SET OF PROCEEDINGS REFUSED: CPR 38.7 CONSIDERED IN DETAIL
In Danielewicz v Cannon & Anor [2023] EWHC 948 (KB) Master Thornett refused the claimant’s application for an order under CPR 38.7. The claimant had issued proceedings twice before, but discontinued those actions. The judgment contains a detailed consideration of…
ANOTHER CHANGE IN THE RULES ON APRIL 6th: PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS CAN SAY GOODBYE (IN SOME CASES) TO THE ADMIRALTY COURT
The focus on the new rules on QOCS coming into force on the 6th April may lead to losing sight of some other changes. In particular the new rules and amendments to the Practice Direction in relation to accidents at…
Damages for pain and suffering: The legal principles and their practical implications: Webinar 12th April 2023
On the 12th April 2023 I am presenting a webinar on “Damages for pain and suffering”. Looking, in a detailed way at the practical issues that a litigator has to consider when dealing with awards for pain and suffering. The…
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 30th MARCH 2023
The changes to the rules as to the set off of QOCS for action issued on or after the 6th April 2023 makes the proper assessment of Part 36 offers of even more importance. Not only will the costs incurred…
CLAIMANT HAD NOT “WON” UNDER PART 36 WHEN SHE HAD NOT BEATEN THE DEFENDANT’S OFFER ON DAMAGES BUT MADE AN OFFER IN RELATION TO LIABILITY: “BAFFLING” ARGUMENTS FAIL TO PREVAIL
NB THE OBSERVATIONS ABOUT PART 36 WERE DOUBTED AND “OVERRULED” BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN Smithstone v Tranmoor Primary School [2026] EWCA Civ 13. SEE THE DISCUSSION IN THE POST ON THE CASE HERE I am grateful to barrister…
SPORTING INJURIES AND CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT CONCEDES THE CLAIMANT’S CASE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION
The judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Czernuszka v King [2023] EWHC 380 (KB) contains important observations in relation to the duty of care owed to those taking place in sporting activities. It also shows the important role of…
JUDGMENT OF A FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY – BUT THIS CASE GOES MUCH FURTHER: COLLUSION IS FOUND
Here we are looking at a case where District Judge Lumb made a clear finding of fundamental dishonesty on the part of a personal injury claimant. That finding was confirmed, or perhaps compounded, by the judge’s views in relation to…
THE NEW RULES ON QOCS AND COSTS 1: IMPLEMENTATION
The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2023 make major changes to the rules relating to the set off of costs and QOCS, reversing the decision of the Supreme Court in Ho -v- Adelkun. Here I want to look at the rule…
You must be logged in to post a comment.