Monthly Archives: September 2015

THERE AREN’T EIGHT DAYS A WEEK: HIGH COURT’S CONCERNS ABOUT CASE MANAGEMENT AND TIMING ISSUES

It is rare for a judgment to begin with the judge setting out a series of concerns on the way that the case has been conducted. This is the situation in the judgment of HH Judge Saffman (sitting as a High Court judge) in Wood -v- Lowe [2015] EWHC 2634. It is these concerns that […]

WHOSE WITNESS STATEMENT IS IT ANYWAY? WELL THE SOLICITOR DRAFTED IT FOR ME

The judgment of Mr Justice Blair in Barrett -v- Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 2627 (QB) deals with many complex issues of causation and law in a difficult clinical negligence case. However I want to deal with just one, almost incidental, comment that highlights a fundamental problem with witness evidence: whose […]

COMMITTAL APPLICATION REFUSED BECAUSE OF LONGSTANDING DEFECTS IN COURT FORM

In Re: Dad Application to commit Muhammad Nawaz Chaudry to prison [2015] EWHC 2655 (Fam) Mr Justice Holman refused an application to commit a respondent to prison on the grounds that the standard form of collection order did not comply with the rules and did not have a penal notice attached. It shows that there […]

ADVERSE INFERENCES FROM MISSING DOCUMENTS AND WITNESSES: ANOTHER CASE TO POINT

We have looked at the decision of Mr Justice Jay in Susan Saunderson & Others -v- Sonae Industria (UK) Ltd [2015] EWCA 2264 (QB) several times, firstly in relation to witness evidence and then in relation to the use of social media in litigation.  However there were arguments as to what inferences the judge should draw […]

CHILDREN AND SUCCESS FEES PART 2: WHAT SUCCESS FEE WAS REASONABLE?

We looked earlier at the decision of the Regional Cost Judge Lumb in the case of A & B -v- The Royal Mail Group  [2015] EW Misc B24(CC)(14th August 2015). As a result of that case the decision of the success fee payable was adjourned for a detailed assessment.  The reserved judgment on that issue was […]

PLEADINGS PROOF AND EVIDENCE: CONFUSION IN ONE OFTEN LEADS TO PROBLEMS WITH THE OTHER

In Mann -v- Shelfside Holdings Limited [2015] EWHC 2583 (QB) the pleadings required rectifying at the start of the trial. The case is an interesting example of problems with pleading and proof. “This is not just a minor pleading point which can be ignored. Such a case would be a wholly different one requiring evidence […]

WHAT A DIFFERENCE A PAGE MAKES: COURT WOULD NOT RECONSIDER JUDGMENT BECAUSE TRIAL BUNDLE WAS MISSING A PAGE

In Absolute Lofts South West London Limited -v- Artisan Home Improvements [2015] EWHC 2632 (IPEC) the claimant had missed a crucial page from the trial bundle. His Honour Judge Hacon refused an application to reconsider his judgment on damages.  If anything showed the importance of checking to ensure that a trial bundle is full and accurate. THE […]