Monthly Archives: March 2015

SOMETHING FOR THE WEEKEND: THE SOLICITOR WHO TOOK ON SALFORD OVER COURT FEES AND WON

I may make a habit of blogging cheerful(ish) stuff on a Friday*. This weeks its hats of to Dominic Cooper of IE Legal Solicitors who was sent me details of his run in, and success, with Salford. THE DISPUTE Like everyone else a few weeks ago Mr Cooper was issuing proceedings promptly to avoid the […]

COSTS NOT RECOVERED WHEN DEFENDANT NOT NAMED IN CFA: SENIOR COSTS OFFICE DECISION

The GWS website has a link to a decision of a decision of Deputy Master Friston made in the Senior Court Costs Office in Hailey -v- Assurance Mutuelle Des Motards (CCD 1405291). It relates to the question whether costs can be recovered when the effective defendant is not named in the CFA. It also has […]

PROPORTIONALITY, BUNDLES AND £3 MILLION SPENT ON COSTS: FAMILY COURT ON PROFLIGATE EXPENDITURE

We have looked at the family courts from time to time in relation to procedure, costs and proportionality. Another example is provided by the judgment of Mr Justice Holman in the case of Gray -v- Work [2015] EWHC 834 (Fam). Excessive bundles and profligate costs feature again. THE CASE The action concerned the wife’s application […]

ITS NOT WHAT THE JUDGE SAID BUT THE WAY THAT THEY SAID IT: DISCUSSIONS FROM DOWN UNDER

The Supreme Court of South Australia made some interesting observations about the interaction between the bench and the bar in Stone -v- Moore [2015] SASC 46 (24th March 2015). In particular what does the appellate court do when a complaint is made about the way a judge said something rather than what was said.  I write about […]

LITIGATE IN HASTE AND YOU WON’T NECESSARILY BE ALLOWED TO AMEND AT LEISURE: SU-LING -v- GOLMAN SACHS INTERNATIONAL

In the judgment today in  Quah Su-Ling -v- Goldman Sachs International [2015] EWHC Mrs Justice Carr DBE refused a claimant permission to amend her particulars of claim at a late stage. The judgment contains a succinct review of the law and principles relating to applications for late amendment and the application of “modern” principles of […]

FOOTBALL, SEX, INJUNCTIONS AND MATERIAL NON-DISCLOSURE: BE CAREFUL NOT TO GET ON THE JUDGE’S OFFSIDE

In YXB -v- TNO Mr Justice Warby set out the importance of full and frank disclosure on parties making an application for an ex-parte injunction.  It also reiterates the importance of claimants giving direct evidence whenever possible and the dangers of solicitors making statements which are, essentially, a mixture of  hearsay, opinion and submissions. THE […]

SOLICITOR FOUND TO HAVE DELIBERATELY MISLED THE COURT: BOREH -v- DJIBOUTI

In Boreh -v- Republic of Djibouti [2015] EWHC 769 (Comm) Mr Justice Flaux made a clear and unequivocal finding that a solicitor had deliberately misled the court. This led to the setting aside of the injunction that the clients had obtained.  Privilege was waived in the case so that judge had the opportunity to read […]