Monthly Archives: February 2014

“STANDING MITCHELL ON ITS HEAD”: YOU SHOULDN’T EVEN BE TAKING THE POINT SAYS HIGH COURT JUDGE: WHY LITIGATORS ARE LIVING WITH THE MITCHELL DILEMMA

Some of the (repeatable) epithets used to describe the consequence of the Mitchell judgment are “mayhem” “madness” and “mess”. In  Summit Navigation Ltd-v- Generalia Romonia [2014] EWHC 398 (Comm) Mr Justice Legatt was critical of a party who took a “Mitchell” point in relation to the late provision of security. A bond of security, due […]

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: CHARTWELL MAY BODE WELL IN SOME CASES

The case of Chartwell Estate Agents –v- Fergies Properties Ltd (QBD Globe J 18/02/2014) is reported in brief on Lawtel this morning. It is an example of the court granting relief from sanctions following late service of witness statements.  This post is based on the Lawtel summary (I have requested a full copy of the […]

DELAYING SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: “DICING WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH”: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A CLAIMANT BUILDING PROBLEMS FOR ITSELF

There are real dangers in leaving service of the claim form until the last moment. The Lincolnshire case considered here exemplifies the problems.   . The judge pulled no punches in relation to the risks being run by those who fail to serve promptly and properly.  The case further highlights the dangers of making, and […]

HAVE YOU BEEN “MITCHELLED”? THE PROBLEMS OF WITHOUT NOTICE ORDERS: A WORKING EXAMPLE

I am grateful to Simon Baskind from Cohen Cramer solicitors in Leeds for the following account of a “Mitchell” problem. ACTION STRUCK OUT BY THE COURT FOR NO GOOD REASON “I know we are all probably suffering from Mitchell overload but here’s another wonderful story to cheer us all up. In my 35 years odd […]

SURVIVING MITCHELL A LITIGATOR’S GUIDE: A 10 POINT RECAP OF KEY POINTS TO DATE (WITH 10 MORE TO FOLLOW).

Cases on the Mitchell principles are reported almost on a daily basis. It is difficult to keep track.  Here I recap on the key points of surviving Mitchell.  I am sure there are many more to come. Here are 10 of the key points to date with 10 more to follow. 1.            DO THINGS ON […]

FREEZING ORDERS AND THE DUTIES OWED ON EX PARTE APPLICATIONS: NUCLEAR WEAPONS THAT CAN BLOW UP IN YOUR FACE

 COOKE -v- VENULUM PROPERTY INVESTMENTS LTD [2013] EWHC 4288 Freezing orders are part of the “nuclear weapons” of civil litigation. As such they should be approached with extreme care.  This case illustrates the dangers involved when a party seeks a freezing order  without notice without a detailed knowledge of the law involved and in circumstances […]

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED: DID THE COURT OF APPEAL TURN A BLIND EYE TO MITCHELL? NELSON -v- CIRCLE CONSIDERED

It is unusual to see the Court of Appeal granting relief from sanctions without reference to CPR 3.9 or the decision in Mitchell. That is precisely what happened in Nelson –v- Circle Thirty Three Housing Trust Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 106. THE FACTS The Claimant brought proceedings against the Defendant for possession of social housing […]

OPINION ON MITCHELL: ARTICLE IN PERSONAL INJURY FOCUS

I decided from the outset that this blog will be a medium for information rather than opinion.However Rachel Rothwell asked me to write an article for the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers Personal Injury Focus.  She wanted my opinions.  The article (together with wonderful graphics) is attached. PI Focus Article

HAVE YOU COMPLIED WITH A PEREMPTORY ORDER? A FURTHER HIGH COURT DECISION ON BREACH & SANCTIONS

 WAHID AND SHADKAM –V- SKANSKA UK PLC AND RIVERSTONE INSURANCE [2014] EWHC 251 (QB) (Mrs Justice Slade DBE). (This case has not yet been reported on Bailli and I will deal with the facts in some detail). THE FACTS This was a personal injury claim.  Both claimants were passengers in a vehicle being driven by […]

REMEMBERING THAT CASE MANAGEMENT HAS A POINT AND PURPOSE: A WORKING EXAMPLE OF PROBLEMATIC PREPARATION

In the furore that now surrounds civil procedure it is often forgotten that the rules of civil procedure are a means to an end. That end being that there IS a fair trial on the disputed issues between the parties,. With those issues being clear in advance and the trial being conducted as economically as […]