Tag Archives: Applications

COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: ANOTHER CASE

There is a brief report on  Browne Jacobson Insurance Law about a case that struck out because of a failure to pay the correct fees. THE REPORT The report is brief and does not give the date of the judgment or level of judge. The facts The claimant, prior to issue, put forward several schedules […]

CAN AN APPLICATION BE AMENDED? AN INTERESTING POINT TO START THE YEAR

There are some procedural issues where you would assume that there was clear pre-existing authority in existence.  However, on examination (usually just before the hearing) it transpires that the point is a “novel” one.   In Agents Mutual Limited-v- Moginnie James Ltd [2016] EWHC 3384 (Ch) Master Matthews considered one such point.  Can a party […]

SECOND APPLICATION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS WAS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS (THIS TIME)

In Holyoake -v- Candy [2016] EWHC 3065 (Ch) Mr Justice Nugee decided that a second application for security for costs was not an abuse of process.  The judgment reviews the law relating to second applications and abuse in detail. It contains some important lessons for anyone considering withdrawing an application, but reserving the right to […]

INTERPRETERS CANNOT (AND WOULD NOT) BE COMPELLED TO ATTEND TRIAL FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION

The case of Kimathi -v- The Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2016] EWHC 3004 (QB) has already featured several times on this blog.  Here we look at the judgment made last week relating to the defendant’s application that interpreters attend trial to give evidence.  It also provides an important example of the court considering and applying […]

LATE AMENDMENT OF PARTICULARS OF CLAIM NOT PERMITTED: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

In a judgment today  in Henderson -v- Dorset Healthcare University Foundation NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 3032 (QB) Mr Justice Warby refused a claimant’s application to amend the Particulars of Claim.  The judgment covers a number of points. In particular it outlines the robust attitude the courts now take to late amendment. KEY POINTS The court […]

THE DANGER OF NOT REPLYING TO CORRESPONDENCE: COSTS AWARDED AGAINST DEFENDANTS (& THE NEED FOR CO-OPERATION WHEN INSTRUCTING EXPERTS)

The judgement of Chief Master Marsh in UPL Europe Limited -v- Agchemaccess Chemicals Limted [2016] EWHC 2898 (Ch) provides an object lesson in the dangers of failing to reply to correspondence. The judgment also contains important observations about need for the parties to co-operate on the nature and scope of expert evidence. “In my judgment […]

BEING A LITIGATOR – WHEN IT ALL GETS TOO MUCH (AND IT IS YOU THAT HAS TO PICK UP THE PIECES)

There have been a number of reported cases recently of young lawyers (sometimes trainees) obviously becoming overwhelmed by their workload.  This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it necessarily confined to young members of the profession. However it is always sad: for the administration of justice; for the clients; for the firms involved and […]