Monthly Archives: May 2014

LATE SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM, RETROSPECTIVE EXTENSIONS AND OTHER CAUSES OF SLEEPLESS NIGHTS: A CASE TO POINT.

The recent case of Kaki –v- National Private Air Transport & National Air Service Ltd  (QBD (Comm) 23/5/2014 raises some interesting issues in relation to the retrospective validation of service of a claim form when that claim form was served late. (The following is based on the Lawtel summary) THE RULES RELATING TO RETROSPECTIVE EXTENSION […]

SURVIVING MITCHELL 20: THE GREAT BIG OVERALL CHECKLIST

I suspect that this series could go on indefinitely.  It is drawn to a close with a round up of the key points. KEY POINTS 1. Know what happened in Mitchell and how it could have been avoided. 2. Assume every order of the court is a peremptory order 3. If you can’t comply with […]

SURVIVING MITCHELL 19: PRACTICE “DEFENSIVE LITIGATION” OR DON’T PRACTICE AT ALL

This is the 19th (and penultimate) in this series on “surviving Mitchell”. What the Mitchell case makes clear is that there is now precious little room for error in civil procedure. We have to develop systems of “defensive litigation”. That is a system whereby the most common cause of mistakes are identified and steps taken […]

“MITCHELL BITES TO PENALISE LITIGANTS WHO FAIL TO COMPLY”: EXTENSIONS OF TIME, APPEALS AND BAHO.

The case of Baho & Ors –v- Meerza [2014] EWCA Civ 669 is a further example of a litigant coming to grief because they failed to file an application in time and make the application for an extension of time promptly.  THE FACTS The appellant sought permission to appeal a committal order of 21 days […]

PROMPTNESS AND APPLICATIONS TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT : THE BIG YELLOW VAN –V- RAYNER 27/05/2014 CONSIDERED

PROMPTNESS AND APPLICATIONS TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT : THE BIG YELLOW VAN –V- RAYNER (2014) IPEC (Judge Hacon) 27/05/2014 CONSIDERED  The importance of a prompt response to procedural issues and setting aside default judgment has been explored previously on this blog. The Big Yellow Van case, reported on Lawtel today, further highlights the need to […]

WITNESS STATEMENTS: NOT ONE BUT TWO “ESSENTIAL CHECKLISTS”

Earlier posts have documented how these checklists were made.  The prequel to the essential checklist sets out matters that practitioners have to watch.  Here I set out the checklist prepared by the group “Stating the Obvious”.   It is no surprise that their checklist was concerned with the basic mechanics of getting hold of witnesses. […]

SECTION 33 AND “LONG TAIL CLAIMS”: CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE AND RELEVANCE OF DELAY BETWEEN THE BREACH AND THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE

In Collins -v- Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 717  the Court of Appeal considered the appropriate legal test  for the date of knowledge and exercise of the section 33 discretion when an action for damages for an asbestos related illness was issued late and the exposure had […]