WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS A SOLICITOR’S FIRM AND THE PROGRESS OF THE CLAIM “HINDERED BY A SERIES OF PROCEDURAL BREACHES”: NOT A GREAT START TO THE ASE
It is a poor start to a solicitor’s application for judicial review of the Legal Ombudsman when the firm itself has failed to comply with rules and directions. We have such a case here. The claimant firm applied for judicial…
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…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS DENIED AFTER A PATTERN OF DEFAULT DELAY AND EXCUSES: TO BREACH ONE UNLESS ORDER MAY BE REGARDED AS MISFORTUNE, TO BREACH TWO LOOKS LIKE …
Staying with the theme this week of the making and breaching of peremptory orders alongside applications for relief from sanctions, we are considering what, on any view, as an “ambitious” application for relief from sanctions. The defendant here had breached…
THE CLAIMANTS FILED A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: COURT REFUSES AN EXTENSION: SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE: OUT OF TIME MEANS OUT OF COURT…
One thing anyone considering an appeal should know, with absolute certainty, is the date the appeal has to be lodged. This, in turn, involves knowing the date on which the period starts running. Here we see a case where the…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED : WHEN NON-COMPLIANCE ALMOST APPEARS TO BE A LITIGATION STRATEGY: HAVING A BONA FIDE CLAIM DOES NOT GIVE YOU A FREE PASS
Here we have a case where the Court of Appeal considered the Denton principles in some detail. The judgment provides a useful reminder of some basic principles. Firstly that a litigant seeking relief from sanctions cannot complain about the original…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026: REMEMBER WE LOOK AT THESE PROBLEMS TO TRY TO MAKE SURE YOU DON’T HAVE THEM
The next webinar in the “Avoiding the Pitfalls” series is a 90 minute long webinar on the 6th February 2026. The webinar examines the most common procedural problems and practical difficulties that arise in civil litigation. It explores where and…
THE COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A PEREMPTORY ORDER IN A SOLICITOR – CLIENT ACTION: LOTS TO LEARN HERE IN TERMS OF BOTH COSTS AND PROCEDURE
Here we are looking at a case that bristles with issues both in relation to solicitor and own client costs, but also in relation to civil procedure and compliance with court orders. It serves as a reminder that a client…
DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED THE DAY BEFORE THE CCMC: “THIS IS HIGH COURT LITIGATION WHICH IS SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH MUST BE COMPLIED WITH”
Here we see another litigant coming to grief because of a failure to file a costs budget on time. The litigant had been warned of the consequences and the judge found that there was no good reason for the breach. …
THROWBACK FRIDAY: APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 POINTS TO IMPROVE THE ODDS: LOOKING BACK TO JANUARY 2016
This blog celebrates its 13th birthday later this year. Civil Litigation Brief started as a series in the Solicitors Journal 35 years ago. Needless to say it has a large “back catalogue”. I wanted a regular opportunity to bring important…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: SPECIAL TWIXMAS EDITION: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO RELY ON PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AS EVIDENCE
The last Witness Evidence Wednesday of the year deals with an unusual case relating to relief from sanctions following a failure to serve witness evidence timeously. The judge at first instance had refused the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions. …
THE AUTOMATIC STAY UNDER CPR 15.11: WAS IT IMPOSED IN THIS CASE? WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD THE COURT CONSIDER WHEN AN APPLICATION IS MADE TO LIFT IT? WAS THE DELAY AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
If a claimant serves proceedings and then does nothing the rules impose an automatic stay on proceedings. CPR 15.11 states that a stay takes effect from 6 months after the date on which a defence should have been filed. Here…
REVIEW OF THE YEAR 9: CASES ON SANCTIONS (AND RELIEF FROM…)(POSSIBLY A POOR CHOICE OF SUBJECT JUST BEFORE CHRISTMAS…)
There have been times in the past when it has felt that the issue of sanctions for non-compliance was the only issue in civil procedure. The number of (reported) cases has reduced, possibly because the relevant principles are now clear….
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EVIDENCE SERVED (VERY LATE): “THE TIME IS NOW”
We have seen examples of witness evidence served late, sometimes very late. Here we see an example of witness evidence served five minutes before a hearing was due to start, and two months late. Further that evidence attempted to disavow…
APPEAL STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF APPELLANTS’ FAILURE TO FILE A COMPLIANT BUNDLE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED
All those involved in the appeal process, indeed litigation generally, are best advised to read this judgment. It is about the standard the court’s expect when an appeal is being brought. It is also about procedural failures and failures to…
DEFENCES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: SHOULD RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS BE GRANTED?
Here we look at a case where the defendants failed to comply with a peremptory order for disclosure. The defences stood struck out. The issue the judge had to determine was whether relief from sanctions should be granted. This in…
COST BITES 303: THE SOLICITOR CANNOT PASS ON RESPONSIBILITY FOR A DEFECTIVE BILL TO THE COSTS LAWYER: A 75% REDUCTION BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE BILL WAS DRAFTED
Here we are looking at a case involving a bill of costs that was wholly defective that the costs judge was invited to strike it out. The judge came very close, but reduced the bill by 75% instead. There…
DOES THE COUNTY COURT HAVE JURISDICTION TO DECIDE AN ACTION BROUGHT ON A FOREIGN JUDGMENT? SHOULD THE ACTION BE STRUCK OUT?
Here we have the County Court considering an unusual issue of jurisdiction. Does it have jurisdiction to decide an action brought at common law on a foreign judgment? If it does not should the action be struck out or simply…
SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL AND TO EXTEND TIME: THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK PERMISSION CAN EASILY BE MISSED: SOMETHING FOR WOULD BE APPELLANTS TO WATCH OUT FOR
The circumstances in which a judge at first instance can grant permission to appeal from their own decision are circumscribed by the rules. Permission can only be given at the hearing itself, or any adjournment thereof. The same applies to…
THE RESPONDENTS’ ARGUMENTS ABOUT FAILURES OF PROCEDURE WERE NOT “NIT PICKING”: RATHER THEY SHOWED THAT THE APPLICATION HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY BROUGHT AND COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED…
There are often major differences of view as to the effect of non-compliance with the rules. We have such differences here. The claimants, in default, regarded the respondents’ procedural objections as “nit-picking”. The judge, however, held that the default was…
HIGH COURT REFUSES RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN SKELETON ARGUMENT WAS SERVED LATE: BREACHES OF EVEN A DAY OR TWO SHOULD NOT BE REGARDED WITH EQUANIMITY
If a skeleton argument is served late then relief from sanctions is required. The case we are looking at here makes it clear that it is prudent to make a formal application rather than assume relief will be granted “on…
WHEN A RESPONDENT’S NOTICE IS REALLY A CROSS-APPEAL: SHOULD THE COURT GRANT AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO ALLOW THE “APPEAL” TO BE ARGUED?
Sometimes a respondent’s notice is really a cross-appeal attempting to disguise itself. We are looking at such a case here. The “respondent’s notice” was served late, and permission was given to serve it. However on closer examination at the appeal…
SHOULD THE COURT GIVE ADEFENDANT PERMISSION TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS SENT “EARLY” BUT NOT SERVED AS A TRIAL WITNESS STATEMENT?
We are looking at an application to rely on a witness statement that was served “late”. The statement had, in fact, been served on the claimants ahead of the deadline but not served as a witness statement for trial. When…
SERVICE POINTS 13: IS A CLAIMANT SAVED BY THE FACT THAT THE DEFENDANT DID NOT FILE AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE OR MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 11? THE COURT OF APPEAL HAVE A VIEW…
Over the years many claimants have been “rescued” by a defendant’s failure to make a timely, or correct, application to dispute the jurisdiction when the claim form has been improperly served. The limits of the defendant’s obligations were considered by…
SERVICE POINTS 12: ANOTHER CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: CPR 7.6 APPLIED AND NOT 3.9 (THE CLAIMANT COULD HAVE GOOGLED THIS)
Here we look at another case where a claimant has come to grief because of a failure to serve the claim form. The ingenious arguments that he should have relief from sanctions were successful at first instance, but were rejected…
WHEN CPR 3.10 CAN HELP: PROCEEDINGS HAD BEEN “ISSUED” ALBEIT IMPERFECTLY AND THE SITUATION COULD BE REMEDIED (TO THE CLAIMANT’S DETERIMENT IN THIS CASE)
I have written before about the “heavy lifting” that sometimes takes place when practitioners attempt to invoke CPR 3.10. Here we look at a case where CPR 3.10 was used to condemn a claimant who had used the wrong procedure…
DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO CHALLENGE COSTS PROVISIONS REFUSED: 21 DAYS WAS A SERIOUS AND SIGNIFICANT BREACH AND THERE WAS NO GOOD REASON FOR IT
Here we are looking at a case where the court refused the defendant’s application to extend time when the defendant wanted to challenge the argument that costs were capped. It was held that the defendant’s delay of 21 days was…
SERVICE POINTS 6: THERE ARE NO EASILY ACCESSIBLE “BACKDOOR” METHODS FOR CIRUMVENTING THE RULES RELATING TO APPLICATIONS FOR RETROSPECTIVE SERVICE
It may not have escaped reader’s notice that we have already started the month by looking at a case about defects in the service of the claim form. The claimants in that case (which was said to be a £22…
APPLYING TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: WHAT IS MEANT BY “PROMPT”? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL BY THE HIGH COURT
When a court considers setting aside a regular default judgment it must have regard to whether the application was made “promptly”. There is a consideration of that issue in the case we consider here. There had been some delay in…
APPEAL COURT UPHOLDS DECISION NOT TO ALLOW DEFENDANT TO RELY ON DOCUMENTS PRODUCED FOR THE FIRST TIME AT TRIAL: DENTON CONSIDERED AND APPLIED
We are looking at a decision newly arrived on BAILII in relation to disclosure and relief from sanctions. A defendant brought (potentially significant) documents to trial which had never been disclosed before. The trial judge did not permit the defendant…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION 2025: WEBINAR 4th AUGUST 2025
One of the most aggravating things to read about in the legal press are those cases where people get into serious disciplinary trouble after having made a procedural or other mistake. It is not the mistake that has caused their…
WHEN A SOLICITOR FORGETS TO SIGN AN IMPORTANT PART OF AN APPEAL DOCUMENT: CAN CPR 3.10 SAVE THE DAY? A TRICKY POINT TO WATCH IN FORM N161
CPR 3.10 is a rule often asked to so some “heavy lifting” by applicants who have not complied with the rules or court orders. Sometimes it is not capable of handling the load, particularly in relation to issues surrounding service…
COURT REFUSES TO GRANT A DEFENDANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE WAS FILED (VERY) LATE: ALSO REJECTS “BRAVE” SUBMISSION THAT THIS WAS A “TECHNICAL” BREACH
There are dozens, possibly hundreds, of posts on this site about the application of the Denton criteria and relief from sanctions. We have another case here. A defendant applied for relief from sanctions when the acknowledgment of service was filed…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 22: WHOLE BATCHES OF CASES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE THE PARTICULARS WERE DEFICIENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED
Here we are looking at a case where numerous actions brought by the claimant were struck out because the Particulars of Claim were wholly deficient. They remained wholly deficient even after the court had made a peremptory order compelling the…
CLAIMANT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (ON APPEAL) FOLLOWING LATE SERVICE OF A COSTS BUDGET (TWO YEARS AND FIVE MONTHS LATE…): BUT AT A COST…
Cases relating to late service of the costs budget are still filtering through. Rarely, however, does the failure extend over 2 years and 4 months as it does here. Despite the delay the claimant’s successfully appealed against the initial refusal…
SECOND (AND THIRD) APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF THAT ARE, ESSENTIALLY, FOR THE SAME THING NOT ALLOWED TO PROCEED: THE APPLICATIONS WERE ABUSIVE
Here we are looking at a case where defendants, debarred from defending an action, made consecutive (and ultimately fruitless) applications to vary the orders that caused them to be debarred and several applications for relief from sanction. The court was…
NO RELIEF FOR CLAIMANTS WHO SERVED THE CLAIM FORM LATE: TAKING A POINT AS TO SERVICE IS NOT “PLAYING TECHNICAL GAMES”
It may be possible for a month to go by without a mis-service of the claim form issue arising in the courts, but it is not this month. We have here a case with the familiar litany of waiting to…
THE JUDGE’S DECISION TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS TO A DEFENDANT WAS APPROPRIATE: SOME WORDS AS TO HOW PEREMPTORY ORDERS SHOULD BE DRAFTED.
Today we are looking at a case where the Court of Appeal upheld a decision granting a defendant relief from sanctions. However this is a case of “two halves” in that the claimant had a more favourable decision in relation…
DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND WAS NOT ABLE TO ARGUE ABOUT COSTS (BUT WAS ALLOWED TO ARGUE ABOUT THE WASTED COSTS)
Here we are looking at another aspect of the case we looked at yesterday. Most of the attention in that case relates to the fake cases that the claimant relied upon. However there was criticism of the defendant too. The…
DEFENDANT GRANTED AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A DEFENCE : “I AM IN NO DOUBT THAT I SHOULD GRANT THE RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION OF OF ONE DAY…”
In Ahmad v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks [2025] EWHC 936 (Pat) Mr Justice Mellor granted the defendant an extension of one day to file a defence, this had the effect of making the defendant’s applications to strike…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AFTER BREACHING A PEREMPTORY ORDER AND FAILING TO PLEAD A CASE PROPERLY: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO CONTINUE (IN PART)
We are looking again at the judgment in Michele Carrington v American International Group UK Limited [2025] EWHC 1010 (TCC). This time in relation to the issue of relief from sanctions. The claimant had failed to comply with a peremptory order to…
£1 MILLION CASE AUTOMATICALLY STRUCK OUT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: THE FACT THAT THIS WAS A “ROGUE SOLICITOR” WAS NOT A STRONG ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF REINSTATEMENT
The judgment of HHJ Hassall in Mr Martyn Ian Haynes v Total Plant Hire Limited is available as a link on an article in the Law Society Gazette, available here. The case involves a detailed consideration of the Denton criteria. In particular some of the arguments on…
THE DENTON PRINCIPLES AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO APPEAL (AGAIN): DELAYS REQUIRE AN EXPLANATION – NOT A CHRONOLOGY
The judgment of HHJ Karen Walden-Smith in Khan & Anor v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor [2025] EWHC 969 (Admin) is the second example this week of the court considering the Denton principles when…
THE DENTON PRINCIPLES: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO APPEAL: A “NUANCED APPROACH” IS REQUIRED
In Yaxley-Lennon v HM Solicitor General [2025] EWCA Civ 476 the Court of Appeal considered the Denton principles in the context of extending time for permission to appeal. The case emphasises that the absence of a good reason for default…
COURT WAS CORRECT TO REFUSE TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHO WAS IN DEFAULT (OH, AND THE PROCEEDINGS HAD NEVER BEEN SERVED PROPERLY ANYWAY…)
In Lumsden v Charles [2025] EWCC 7 HHJ Peter Marquand refused a claimant’s application for relief from sanctions. The claimant had issued Part 8 proceedings but failed to serve the witness evidence and particulars with the proceedings by the rules. …
AN UNUSUAL SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM CASE: COURT GRANTS AN EXTENSION OF TIME IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE CORONER
In Whittle v HM Coroner for North West Wales [2025] EWHC 236 (Admin) the Administrative Court dealt with an issue relating to failure to serve the claim form in time. The Court found a solution. However the judgment is important…
DENTON DID NOT APPLY TO THE DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME: HOWEVER – CONSIDERING THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE – THE APPLICATION WAS REFUSED
In Bailey & Ors v GlaxoSmithKline UK Ltd [2025] EWHC 186 (KB) Mr Justice Bourne considered whether the defendant should have an extension of time. The judge considered whether the “Denton” principles apply to the defendant’s application and if not…
MAKING AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS? 10 KEY POINTS TO HELP
Periodically I revisit posts on this blog to see whether they remain of relevance – this post (from January 2016) does. It sets out ten key points in making an application for relief from sanctions. Every point made nine years…
ACTIONS OF TWO CLAIMANTS STRUCK OUT BECAUSE THEIR WITNESS STATEMENTS WERE IN ENGLISH AND THEY COULD NOT SPEAK ENGLISH: “THE SOLICITORS HAVE NOT DONE THEIR DUTY APPROPRIATELY”
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Rashpal Samrai & Ors v Rajinder Kalia [2024] EWHC 3143 (KB). More accurately we are looking at a preliminary judgment in the case which appears as an annexe to…
ITS NOT TOO LATE IN THE YEAR FOR “CLAIM FORM” CASES: JUDGE ALLOWS APPEAL AND GRANTS CLAIMANT EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: CPR 3.9 & DENTON DID NOT APPLY
I am grateful to solicitor Chris Topping of Broudie Jackson Canter for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Bird in Brown -v- the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police (5th December 2024). The judge allowed an appeal against the…
CASE STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH UNLESS ORDER: APPLICATION TO ADJOURN TO ALLOW RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATION REFUSED: DENTON CRITERIA CONSIDERED
In Gladwin v RSM UK Restructuring Advisory LLP [2024] EWHC 3054 (Ch) ICC Judge Barber held that the claimant’s case was struck out because of a failure to comply with a peremptory order. The judge refused the claimant’s application to…
You must be logged in to post a comment.