Tag Archives: Conduct

ATTRITIONAL WARFARE; UNMERITORIOUS POINTS AND UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS OF BAD FAITH: SO MUCH (AND MORE) IN ONE JUDGMENT

The judgment today of Mr Justice Edis in  Hayden -v- Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust makes for uncomfortable reading on the issue of the general attitude of the lawyers towards the conduct of the litigation.   In addition to criticism of the parties conduct it  deals with important issues in relation to (i) filing […]

I WROTE LOTS OF UNEDIFYING, AGGRESSIVE AND UNCOOPERATIVE LETTERS: LOOK WHERE IT GOT ME

One of aspects of the judgment in  McTear -v- Englehard [2016] EWCA Civ 487 that could easily be overlooked is the observations of Lord Justice Vos in relation to the nature of the  correspondence between the parties. “It would seem that if law firms are seeking to invest time, energy and costs in protracted and […]

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE LAWYER’S DUTY NOT TO MISLEAD

There are some important observations  by Mr Justice Leggatt in Al-Saadoon & Others -v- the Secretary of State for Defence [2016] EWHC 773 (Admin).  The case relates to witness statements and the duty of the lawyer when they know that there are conflicting witness statements from the client. (There is an argument that it also […]

IT’S ALL ABOUT THE COSTS (AND A LOT OF TROUBLE): COURT OF APPEAL CASE CONSIDERED

The Court of Appeal judgment today  in Patience -v- Tanner [2016] EWCA Civ 158 is a classic example of the difficulties that arise when a case is, in essence, all about the costs. It shows the danger of making, and then withdrawing an offer. Litigation went on for a long time after the offer was […]

WHAT IS THE POINT OF THE PORTAL? INSURERS CONTACTING CLAIMANTS DIRECTLY: STILL

I post (with his permission) a letter from Kerry Kirkbride.  It relates to the regular issue of insurers ignoring claimant solicitors and writing to claimants directly after notification on the Portal. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE PORTAL? “I am a claimant Personal Injury Lawyer and a Director of Active Legal. I am writing to […]

“NEAR MISS” RULE NO LONGER APPLICABLE: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ON COSTS

In Sugar Hut Group Limited -v- AJ Insurance Services [2016] EWCA Civ 46 the Court of Appeal overturned an award of costs made against a successful party. “The Claimants’ recovery exceeded the Part 36 offer by a comfortable margin and in any event there is no longer a “near-miss” rule. There is no basis upon […]

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS: COMPLIANCE WITH ORDERS, ABSENT STATEMENTS AND LATE BUNDLES

In F-v-M [2015] EWHC 3259 (Fam) Mr Justice Cobb made a wasted costs order against a firm of solicitors. The judgment is (and was designed to be) an object lesson in the need to comply with court directions and court orders. “Whether difficulties in complying with court orders arise out of funding difficulties or otherwise, […]