Monthly Archives: June 2016

DEFAULT JUDGMENT ON COUNTERCLAIM NOT SET ASIDE – AN OBJECT LESSON IN STAYING AWAKE IN LITIGATION

The decision of Master Matthews today in Goldcrest Distribution Ltd -v- McCole [2016] EWHC 1571 (Ch) provides an object lesson in the need to stay awake to procedural issues throughout litigation. The claimant had a default judgment on a counterclaim entered against them.   The judge refused to set it aside. Consequently the whole of […]

COSTS BUDGETING & DAVID -v- GOLIATH: DOES IT GIVE THE “LITTLE GUY” A CHANCE?

Costs budgeting remains highly controversial.  One question that is open to debate is – is it useful?  Its utility may be most apparent in cases where the sizes and resources of the litigants are vastly disparate. (Many personal injury lawyers would argue that this is virtually every personal injury case where the defendant is insured, […]

PROVING THINGS 23: SERVING IMPORTANT EVIDENCE LATE

It is surprising how many posts there are on this blog which deal with the late service of witness evidence.  This is an issue that occurs across the whole spectrum of civil procedure.  The question arose again in the judgment today of Mrs Justice Proudman in Ingram -v- Ahmed [2016] EWHC 1536 (Ch).  This case […]

PART 36: ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS AND INTEREST

In Bolt Burdon -v- Tariq [2016] EWHC 1507 (QB) Mr Justice Spencer considered the appropriate approach to additional liabilities where a claimant beats its own Part 36 offer and interest was awarded on a contractual basis.  However the judgment appears to apply to awards of interest generally. “Had it been the intention always to exclude […]

BREXIT: THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES: USEFUL LINKS

The vote to leave the EU has legal consequences across a wide range of practice areas. Here I aim to provide links to useful posts and articles that discuss those issues. This post is updated regularly. THE INDIVIDUAL SECTIONS There are sections below which have links to key areas Litigation Article 50 and legal issues […]

PROVING THINGS 22: DAMAGES, MITIGATION , PART 36 (AND EVEN SOMETHING ABOUT BUNDLES)

The Court of Appeal decision today in Pawar -v- JSD Haulage Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 551 contains some important lessons in relation to proving damages, mitigation of loss and Part 36 offers. “The fact that a claimant does not mitigate his loss does not mean automatically that he recovers nothing. It means he is not […]

WHO WON? CLAIMANTS GET 33% OF THEIR COSTS AFTER TRIAL

In the judgment today in Kupeli -v- Cyprus Turkish Airlines [2016] EWHC 1478 (QB) Mrs Justice Whipple considered issues relating to costs liability after the trial of a preliminary issue. “….there is a world of difference between a case which comes to trial after reasonable efforts at settlement have been made but settlement has proved […]

ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW IV: “AVOID BULLSHIT, SMOKE AND MIRRORS” (OH AND BEWARE OF “WELL PADDED VANITY”)

In the fourth in this series we are returning to Australia and looking at the guidance given by the Hon Chief Justice Pat Keane in his keynote address to the Australian Lawyers Alliance Queensland State Conference in February 2013. Remember the main aim of these posts is to whet your appetite so you read the […]

SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS AND MISSING DOCUMENTS: WHY IT IS DANGEROUS FOR A DEFENDANT TO ATTEMPT TO STAND ON ITS RIGHTS

When proceedings are served and key documents are missing it is tempting for a defendant to attempt to stand on its rights and not reply at all to the claim. However the case of Rushworth -v- Harvey [2016] EWHC 1386 (QB) shows that this is a dangerous practice. A claim form served without the accompanying […]

THE HARB CASE: IT’S ALL ABOUT THE EVIDENCE: A TRIAL JUDGE MUST “SHOW THEIR WORKINGS”

The Court of Appeal judgment in Harb -v- HRR Prince Abdul Aziz Bin Fahd Bin Abdud Aziz [2016] EWCA Civ 556 has attracted a lot of attention because of the comments the Court made about the allegations of judicial bias. However it is important to remember that this appeal was not decided on the basis […]