Monthly Archives: June 2013

ONE DIRECTION SINGING FROM THE SAME HYMN SHEET ?

THE USE OF STANDARD DIRECTIONS   I have put the standard directions as a link because they will normally be the first port of call for anyone drafting directions (and I once spent a frustrating half hour trying to find them).   The Practice Direction to Part 26 envisages that the standard directions will form […]

Useful Links on Civil Litigation Brief

Make sure you check out the links section on Civil Litigation Brief, it contains some useful links for all litigators  including the new link to  the Ministry of Justice website which provides model standard orders for directions.

THANKS FOR THE £500,000. NOW WHERE’S THE EXTRA £50,000 YOU OWE ME? KNOWING THE RISKS AND ADVANTAGES FOR THE CLAIMANT IN THE NEW PART 36

The new provisions when a claimant beats their own Part 36 provide challenges (including potential negligence claims) for the claimant lawyer.  A claimant who beats their own Part 36 offer at trial now obtains considerable benefit.  CPR 36.13(3) states that where a claimant at trial obtains “judgment against the defendant is at least as advantageous […]

Extensions of time after Jackson: Safety First

Taking a close look at the decision in Atrium Training Services [2013] EWHC regarding extensions of time and its practical significance for litigators  One of my main reasons for starting this blog was to keep a close eye on developments in civil procedure after the implementation of the Jackson reforms.  Although the reforms were primarily […]

SUING THE “MAN OF STRAW”: IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT THE IMPECUNIOUS AND UNINSURED DEFENDANT?

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 other cases, however, the case often comes to an end. IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU […]

INTERIM PAYMENTS AND THE SERIOUSLY INJURED CLAIMANT: SOMEWHERE TO LIVE OR DOWN AT EELES?

Cases and principles relating to interim payments and accommodation in catastrophic injury cases. Prior to the decision in Cobham Hire Services –v- Eeles [2009] EWCA Civ 204 it was a relatively simple matter to obtain a substantial interim payment in a catastrophic injury case.  All that had to be show was that the payment sought […]