Common issues relating to the construction of Part 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules and its inter-action with Part 44, which contains general rules about costs, and Section II of Part 45, which contains rules about costs in certain kinds of road traffic accident claims. Judges: Pill, Moore-Bick, Aikens LJJ, Hurst SCJ Citations: [2011] EWCA … Continue reading Solomon v Cromwell Group Plc: CA 19 Dec 2011
Judgment in default had been entered against the defendant after the court had in its own discretion corrected an error in service of the claim form. The form had been served personally in Reykjavik, but that form of service was not allowed in Iceland. Held: The appeal was allowed. Rule 3.10 could not be used … Continue reading Olafsson v Gissurarson: QBD 8 Dec 2006
(High Court of Australia) Legal practitioners – Negligence – Immunity from suit – Applicant sought legal assistance from first respondent, a statutory corporation deemed to be a firm of solicitors, in defence of criminal prosecution – First respondent retained second respondent, a barrister, to appear for applicant at committal proceedings – Applicant pleaded guilty at … Continue reading D’Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid: 10 Mar 2005
Further applications in defendant’s application for summary judgment and or security for costs in the claimant’s claim alleging copyright infringement. Held: The claimant was ordered to pay a sum of andpound;50,000 as security for costs.Kitchin J summarised the principles: ‘(i) the court has jurisdiction under rule 24.6 to make an order which is tantamount to … Continue reading Allen v Bloomsbury Publishing Plc and Another: ChD 18 Mar 2011
E Was born with and still suffered severe learning difficulties. The court was asked as to the extent of his capacity to make decisions, and as to where he should live, with a family member, the carer or with the local authority, which had removed him from her care. As he had become an adult, … Continue reading G v E and Others: CoP 26 Mar 2010
The defendants had failed to comply with an ‘unless’ order requiring disclosure, and had been first debarred from defending the cases as to liability. They applied to a second judge who granted relief from sanctions after new solicitors had complied with the order. The claimant challenged the right of the second judge to grant such … Continue reading Thevarajah v Riordan and Others: SC 16 Dec 2015
An application had been made to set aside a possession order obtained by a social landlord and determined by a district judge who applied CPR3.1 (7), when setting the possession order aside. By the time the landlord’s appeal against that decision was heard, the decision in Forcelux was available and the circuit judge held that … Continue reading London Borough of Hackney v Findlay: CA 20 Jan 2011
UTIAC Rule 9(5) of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, which provides for UNHCR participation in Upper Tribunal proceedings as an intervener in an ‘asylum case’, is to be construed purposively to include subsidiary (humanitarian) protection. In deciding whether to accept an application by an appellant to withdraw an appeal in an asylum-related case … Continue reading HM and Others (Article 15(C)) Iraq CG: UTIAC 22 Sep 2010
Judges: MacDuff J Citations: [2010] EWHC 311 (QB), [2010] 3 Costs LR 402 Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 36 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Costs, Litigation Practice, Civil Procedure Rules Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.401923
Application under CPR r81.14(1) for permission to bring proceedings for committal for interference with the administration of justice. That is covered by Section III of CPR Part 81 (r81.12 to r81.14). The interference relied on is the use of documents disclosed in an action for a collateral purpose, contrary to CPR r31.22 Judges: Birss J … Continue reading Grosvenor Chemicals Ltd and Others v UPL Europe Ltd and Others: ChD 26 Jul 2017
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014
Three prisoners raised questions as to the circumstances in which the Parole Board is required to hold an oral hearing before making an adverse decision. One of the appeals (Osborn) concerned a determinate sentence prisoner who was released on licence but then recalled to custody. The other appeals (Booth and Reilly) were indeterminate sentence prisoners … Continue reading Osborn v The Parole Board: SC 9 Oct 2013
The court considered a contributory invalidity scheme: ‘today the general rule is that Article 6(1) does apply in the field of social insurance, including even welfare assistance . . State intervention is not sufficient to establish that Article 6(1) is inapplicable; other considerations argue in favour of the applicability of Article 6(1) in the instant … Continue reading Schuler-Zgraggen v Switzerland: ECHR 24 Jun 1993
The Claimants were the residents of a housing estate who applied for a Group Litigation Order to pursue their claim of nuisance and negligence against a waste contractor. The Defendant requested the disclosure of their ‘after the event’ insurance policy as a condition of the GLO. Held: The policy was disclosable both under CPR31.14 and … Continue reading Barr and Others v Biffa Waste Services Ltd: TCC 15 May 2009
The appellant sought to restrict publication by the defendants in the Mail on Sunday of matters which he said were a breach of confidence. He had lied to a court in giving evidence, whilst at the same time being ready to trash the reputation of his opponent. The judge had refused to excise the details … Continue reading Lord Browne of Madingley v Associated Newspapers Ltd: CA 3 Apr 2007
An application for an anti-social behaviour order against an individual was a civil, not a criminal proceeding. The standard of evidence required was on the balance of probability; the civil standard. Such proceedings were not subject to the additional protection of the human rights convention. Necessarily, the circumstances from which protection was sought were ones … Continue reading Regina v Manchester Crown Court, ex parte McCann and others: QBD 22 Nov 2000
The claimant had failed to file a document at court, and omitted to apply for an extension of time to file it. The defendant now appealed the grant by the court of that extension of time notwithstanding. Held: The appeal failed. The rules did not remove the judge’s discretion to make such an order. Judges: … Continue reading Keen Phillips (A Firm) v Field: CA 26 Oct 2006
The respondent brought in laws restricting marriages between persons subject to immigration control, requiring those seeking non Church of England marriages to first obtain a certificate from the defendant that the marriage was approved. The applicants said this was discriminatory and infringed their human rights. Held: Legislation which prevented marriages of convenience between aliens and … Continue reading Baiai and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 10 Apr 2006
Application under Part 31 of the Civil Procedure Rules for pre-action disclosure. Judges: Akenhead J Citations: [2009] EWHC 250 (TCC) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.291787
The claimant sought damages in negligence against solicitors who had advised the executors in an estate of which he was a beneficiary. He now sought to amend his claim to make a claim in his personal and in derivative capacities. Sums had been paid out of the estate which had defeated the inheritance rights of … Continue reading Roberts v Gill and Co and Another: CA 15 Jul 2008
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt. Held: The House equated the contempt to a breach of an injunction … Continue reading Scott v Scott: HL 5 May 1913
The defendants appealed convictions for contempt of court, on the basis of having wilfully interrupted the court. The respondent said that no appeal lay. Held: The statute was ambiguous, and ‘there can be no good reason why a person convicted under s.12 should not have a right of appeal against conviction as well as against … Continue reading Haw and Another v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court: Admn 12 Dec 2007
The appellants appealed against a refusal to strike out as an abuse of process the respondent’s claim against them for professional negligence in the drafting of development agreements.Buxton LJ considered the nature of the enquiry on such an application: ‘The court . . has to consider, by an intense focus on the facts of the … Continue reading Taylor Walton (A Firm) v Laing: CA 15 Nov 2007
The applicants complained that they had been made subject to non-derogating control orders as suspected terrorists, but that the failure to inform them of the allegations or evidence against them was unfair and infringed their human rights. The material was withheld in the interests of national security. Held: The failure to supply the defendants with … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF AN and AE (No 3): HL 10 Jun 2009
Application for disclosure against a non-party. Citations: [2006] EWHC 2756 (TCC) Links: Bailii Statutes: Supreme Court Act 1981 34, Civil Procedure Rules 1998 31.17 Litigation Practice, Civil Procedure Rules Updated: 08 July 2022; Ref: scu.246935
The House was asked whether an asylum applicant whose original application was determined in Scotland, but his application for leave to appeal rejected in London, should apply to challenge those decisions in London or in Scotland. Held: Such an application must be heard in Scotland save only in exceptional circumstances. The appropriate forum would be … Continue reading Tehrani v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 18 Oct 2006
The police sought the closure of premises under an anti-social behaviour order. Held: A body seeking such an order had an obligation to serve written copies of the evidence upon which they wished to rely on the proposed respondent. The respondent had therefore been entitled to the adjournment he sought but was refused by the … Continue reading Cleary, Regina (on the Application of) v Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court and others: Admn 26 Jul 2006
Objection was made to the use of an expert witness who had formerly been a senior employee of the defendant. Held: The court set out criteria for testing the independence of a proposed expert witness: ‘i) It is always desirable that an expert should have no actual or apparent interest in the outcome of the … Continue reading Armchair Passenger Transport Ltd v Helical Bar Plc and Another: QBD 28 Feb 2003
The defendants appealed a decision that they had no sufficient reason for not attending court on the day of the trial. Held: The fact that the defendants had a continuing commercial relationship with the claimants was not enough to justify an inference that they should be aware of proceedings served at a former address. In … Continue reading Estate Acquisition and Development Ltd v Wiltshire and Another: CA 4 May 2006
The patent application had been presented to the European Patent Office and granted only after 13 years. The claimant now appealed refusal to allow amendment of its claim to allow a claim in its sole name. The defendant argued that it was out of time. Held: The appeal succeeded: ‘ the long-standing rule of practice … Continue reading Rhone-Poulenc Rorer International Holdings Inc and Another v Yeda Research and Development Co Ltd: ChD 16 Feb 2006
Various parties appealed refusal and grant of extensions of time for service of claim forms. Held: The court gave detailed guidance. The three central issues were the proper construction of the rule, the question of whether the court could reconsider an application made without notice and on paper, and whether the Hashtroodi guidance was being … Continue reading Collier v Williams and others: CA 25 Jan 2006
Attempt to avoid normal civil appeal process by use of judicial review – whether abuse of process. The underlying claim had been struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. Permission to appeal had been refused. Permission to bring judicial review of that decision had itself been refused on the basis that the CPR … Continue reading Nduka, Regina (on the Application of) v Her Honour Judge Riddel: Admn 21 Oct 2005
The parties had disputed payments for subcontracting work on a major project. The matter had been referred to arbitration, and the claimants now appealed refusal of leave to appeal the adjudicator’s award. Held: The dispute was complex and substantial. Nevertheless, the adjudicator ‘not only took the initiative in ascertaining the facts but also applied his … Continue reading Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd: CA 16 Nov 2005
An order had been made restraining the defendant trades unions from taking industrial action. The unions said the UK court had no jurisdiction. Held: ‘It is at first sight surprising that the English Commercial Court should be the forum in which a dispute between a Finnish company and a Finnish Trade Union and an international … Continue reading International Transport Workers’ Federation and Another v Viking Line Abp and Another: CA 3 Nov 2005
The client challenged his opponent’s solicitors bill of costs, saying that the other side had not been given an estimate of costs. The solicitor acted on several matters for the client and had not given a formal estmate. Held: The absence of the estimate should not deprive the solicitor of payment for the work undertaken … Continue reading Garbutt and Another v Edwards and Another: CA 27 Oct 2005
The claimants sought to amend their particulars of claim to add a request for declarations with regard to a bill of lading and contract for carriage. Held: The application to amend was made more than six years after the cause of action accrued. It was in its nature a new claim. The additional possibility that … Continue reading P and O Nedloyd BV v Arab Metals Co and Others (‘The UB Tiger’): QBD 22 Jun 2005
Judges should be careful not to create judicial checklists which added a gloss to the civil procedure rules. The claimant’s action had been stayed automatically for not having progressed for a year. The judge applied the checklist in Annodeus to lift the stay. Held: The use of judicially created checklists would create a satellite body … Continue reading La Baguette Ltd and Others v Audergon: CA 23 Jan 2002
The claimant licensee alleged that the license contract had been repudiated by the defendant licensor. The claimant succeeded at the trial of liability. The defendant had made a payment into court. The judge was told of the payment but not of the amount. He ordered the defendant to pay the costs of the liability trial … Continue reading HSS Hire Services Group Plc v BMB Builders Merchants Ltd and Another: CA 24 May 2005
The defendants appealed against confiscation orders on the basis that in various ways, the Crown had failed to comply with procedural requirements. Held: The courts must remember the importance of such procedures in the fight against crime, and must not allow procedural or technical failures to defeat that purpose. Courts should rather look to see … Continue reading Sekhon, etc v Regina: CACD 16 Dec 2002
The court considered what was meant by ‘act promptly’ in the Rule. Held: Dictionary definitions were considered by both Arden LJ and Simon Brown LJ – ‘with alacrity’ or ‘all reasonable celerity in the circumstances’. The court no longer has a broad discretion whether to grant such an application: all three of the conditions listed … Continue reading Regency Rolls Ltd and Another v Carnall: CA 16 Oct 2000
The parties had been involved in a bitter and protracted boundary dispute. The judge had found a minimal encroachment, and awarded nominal damages. He had made an error in the order. At an appeal counsel was given leave to apply to amend the oder under the slip rule (r40.12). Held: The amendment was not the … Continue reading Markos v Goodfellow and others: CA 30 Nov 2001
A party will not be allowed to file pleadings which required him to make contradictory statements of truth in a unified claim. The alternative may be for the proceedings to go ahead as separate, non-unified claims. When considering whether there was evidence to support an amendment, the court should apply the same test as for … Continue reading Clarke (executor of the will of Francis Bacon, deceased) v Marlborough Fine Art (London) Ltd and Another: ChD 20 Nov 2001
The claimant appealed against a costs award made to him when acting as a litigant in person. Held: The appeal was allowed. A litigant in person may be able to claim for the costs of his research, subject to the cap in the rules. Schiemann LJ said: ‘If one reads together 48.6(2) and (4) one … Continue reading Wulfsohn, Regina (on the Application of) v Legal Service Commission: CA 8 Feb 2002
EAT This interlocutory appeal raises a point of general importance regarding Employment Tribunal practice where one Tribunal revisits and varies or alters an interlocutory order or direction made by an earlier Tribunal. We use the expression Tribunal to include a Chairman properly sitting alone.’ Held: Although it was open to an Employment Tribunal to make … Continue reading Goldman Sachs Services Ltd v Montali: EAT 19 Oct 2001
The defendant claimed that he had gone absent without leave from the RAF as a conscientous objector. Held: The defendant had not demonstrated by complaint to the RAF that he did object to service in Iraq. In some circumstances where there was no procedure to make his objection known, the failure to do so might … Continue reading Khan v Royal Air Force Summary Appeal Court: Admn 7 Oct 2004
Claimants sought damages for personal injuries after immunisation with the MMR vaccine. Citations: [2001] EWCA Civ 2027 Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Davies v Eli Lilly and Co (Opren Litigation) CA 1987 The powers in the section together with the power to make orders for costs under … Continue reading Afrika and others v Cape Plc and others; X Y Z and Others v Schering health Care Ltd; Sayers and Others v Merck, Smithkline Beecham plc MMR/MR vaccine litigation: CA 21 Dec 2001
Brooke LJ said: ‘before the Civil Procedure Rules came into effect . . if a claimant substantially succeeded he was likely to be awarded an order for costs even though he failed on certain issues. The new Rules provide a break from that tradition and enable a court to do greater justice if a party … Continue reading Winter v Winter: CA 10 Nov 2000
The claimant sought payment as part of its costs of the legal expenses insurance premium it had paid in the period between April 1 and July 2000. The respondent said it had not complied with the rules. This was required by the Act. Held: The Act came into effect on April 1st, but the rules … Continue reading Inline Logistics Ltd v UCI Logistics Ltd: CA 27 Mar 2002
The word ‘private’ in rule 39.2 means the same as ‘secret’. Lord Justice Mance said: ‘It may be equated with the old ‘in camera’ procedure, rather than the old ‘in chambers’ procedure.’ Privacy and confidentiality are features long assumed to be implicit in parties’ choice to arbitrate in England. Judges: Mance VC, Carnwath, Mance LJJ … Continue reading Department of Economic Policy and Development of City of Moscow and Another v Bankers Trust Company and Another: CA 25 Mar 2004
EAT Practice and Procedure – Case ManagementIn considering whether or not to strike out or impose some lesser remedy the guiding consideration was the overriding objective which required justice to be done between the parties and that in particular the Tribunal should consider the magnitude of the default, whether the default was the responsibility of … Continue reading Weir Valves and Controls (UK) Ltd v Armitage: EAT 15 Oct 2003
The applicant had been sentenced to detention during Her Majesty’s Pleasure. He sought a judicial review of the Lord Chief Justice’s recommendation to the Home Secretary for the minimum term he was to serve. Held: In exercising this function, the LCJ was acting in a judicial capacity, and therefore his recommendation was not subject to … Continue reading Regina (on the Application of Dudson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Lord Chief Justice: Admn 21 Nov 2003
The court considered the circumstances under which a Hearing Officer’s decision could be reversed on appeal: ‘Those experienced in cases such as these, such as the Hearing Officer, would have known that the sort of evidence normally adduced on issues of distinctiveness included evidence from editors of trade and other magazines, evidence from buyers of … Continue reading E I Du Pont De Nemours and Company v S T Dupont; Du Pont Trade Mark: CA 10 Oct 2003
The claimant sought damages from his wife for personal injuries. He had been late beginning the claim, and it was served without particulars. He then failed to serve the particulars within 14 days. Totty and then Sayers had clarified the procedure for applications for extension of time. Held: The lower courts had failed to apply … Continue reading Price v Price (Trading As Poppyland Headware): CA 26 Jun 2003
The claimant appealed against an order refusing an extension of time for service of her particulars of claim. She had made the application before the period expired. Held: The rules made a clear distinction between applications made before time expired and those made afterwards. For the latter the rules laid down a checklist. It was … Continue reading Robert v Momentum Services Ltd: CA 11 Feb 2003
The claimant had been awarded damages for sex discrimination, including a sum of andpound;25,000 for injury to feelings. The respondent appealed. Held: The Court of Appeal looked to see whether there had been an error of law in the employment tribunal decision. It did not look to see whether the Employment Appeal Tribunal had erred … Continue reading Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2): CA 20 Dec 2002
The applicant’s claim had been dismissed for late service. The defendant had in fact received the documents, but the service appeared deemed to be out of time. The subsequent decisions of Anderton and Godwin meant that the judge’s reasoning no longer applied. Held: In such cases the discretion available to the court under the rules … Continue reading Wilkey and Another v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another: CA 22 Oct 2002
An agreement was made for a redevelopment of land. The council sought an order requiring specific performance by the respondent of its obligations. The council sought summary judgment, which the respondent resisted claiming that it was presently impossible to proceed. Held: The judge had been wrong, on an application for summary judgement, to proceed on … Continue reading North East Lincolnshire Borough Council v Millenium Park (Grimsby) Ltd: CA 23 Oct 2002
The claimant succeeded in her action for personal injuries. She appealed against an order for costs in her favour on the standard basis, saying that it should have been on an indemnity basis. Judges: Schiemann, Tuckey, Jonathon Parker LJJ Citations: [2002] 3 All ER 263, [2002] EWCA Civ 398, [2002] PIQR 591, [2003] 1 WLR … Continue reading Huck v Robson: CA 21 Mar 2002
The case concerned the management of substantial multi-party actions, and in particular the form of costs orders. The claimants sought a payment of the ‘common costs’ element to be made payable as the appropriate relative common issues were resolved. Held: The purpose of the new rules was to clarify the sharing of the burden of … Continue reading Sayers and Others v Smith Kline Beecham plc and Others; X, Y, Z and Others v Schering Health Care Ltd and Others; Afrika and Others v Cape plc: CA 21 Dec 2001
Litigation had followed an accident. The claimant, a passenger, sought and won damages for personal injuries. He had taken out legal expenses insurance, and at dispute was the recovery of the cost of that insurance. He had been unaware of having the insurance and had also paid out for after the event insurance. He sought … Continue reading Sarwar v Alam: CA 19 Sep 2001
The claimant sought damages alleging defamation. The judge ordered certain elements of the case to be heard first, and others, if necessary later. Although the case had been begun under the old rules, the new civil procedure regime gave the judge much wider powers of management, and defamation cases were notoriously expensive and lengthy and … Continue reading GKR Karate (UK) Limited v Porch, Yorkshire Post Newspaper, Holmes: QBD 17 Jan 2000
The respondent had been refused an order for security for costs. He was US resident abroad but had assets in Switzerland, and the judge had considered herself unable to make the order under the Rules and the Convention. The assets would be easily removed, and may not even be capable of being pursued, and accordingly … Continue reading Hans David De Beer v Kanaar and Co (a Firm): CA 9 Aug 2001
Judgment creditors obtained a garnishee order nisi, but the bank objected to the order being made absolute. The account was in Hong Kong, where there was a real danger, that the law would not relieve them of their obligation to the account holders to pay the balance to them, after satisfaction of the garnishee debt. … Continue reading Societe Eram Shipping Company Ltd v Compagnie International De Navigation and Others: CA 7 Aug 2001
Two foreign nationals with leave to remain in this country committed serious crimes. The Secretary of State ordered their deportation. Held: Where the deportation of a foreigner following a conviction here, would conflict with his human rights, the court had to assess whether the, first, the objective could be achieved by some alternative, less interfering, … Continue reading Samaroo and Sezek v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 17 Jul 2001
(Antigua and Barbuda) The applicant was employed as a civil servant. He joined a demonstration alleging corruption in a minister. It was alleged he had infringed his duties as a civil servant, and he replied that the constitution allowed him to speak out. Held: The demonstration did contravene the restriction on publishing his views. Analogies … Continue reading De Freitas v The Permanent Secretary of Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, Lands and Housing and others: PC 30 Jun 1998
The applicant had sought to exercise his statutory right of appeal from a decision by his professional body. The judge had considered that leave was necessary under the rules, and granted limited permission. The applicant appealed, saying that his statutory right of appeal could not be limited except by clear and specific provision. The court … Continue reading Colley v Council for Licensed Conveyancers: CA 17 Jul 2001
Where it was not the claimant’s fault that proceedings had not been issued within the appropriate time limit, the judge when considering exercise of his discretion to admit the claim, should not be tempted to refuse to admit it on the basis that the claimant would have a clear claim for negligence against the solicitor … Continue reading Steeds v Peverel Management Services Limited: CA 30 Mar 2001
A solicitor claimed the sum of andpound;59.00 for the cost of preparing his legal aid bill for assessment. The court had disallowed the costs of an in-house costs draftsman preparing the bill. The Costs Procedure Rules would generally allow something toward such a charge. The Court of Appeal had given leave to appeal although the … Continue reading A Local Authority v A Mother and Child: CA 20 Dec 2000
The defendant challenged an order that he should pay the plaintiff’s costs, having made an offer in correspondence which was not accepted. Held: The claimant had exaggerated his claim, but the defendant’s offer had been inadequate. The judge’s order was fundamentally sound but an adjustment was made to require the claimant to pay half of … Continue reading Amber v Stacey: CA 15 Nov 2000
A court action had become stale, and was at risk of automatic striking out. One party wrote the court requesting directions or that the judge direct a case management conference if appropriate. He did not seek the approval of the defendant. It was held that the letter, and its being read by the judge, was … Continue reading Reliance National Insurance Company (Europe) Limited and Another v Ropner Insurance Services Limited: CA 1 Dec 2000
In the new litigation culture it was correct to strike out a second action which fundamentally re-litigated a case which had previously been struck out on the grounds of abuse of process or delay. The court’s case management required it to consider whether it was appropriate to expend time on a case. When facing such … Continue reading Ashton and Another v Securum Finance Ltd: CA 21 Jun 2000
It was possible to amend pleadings outside of the limitation period, where the alteration to identify the correct party was genuine and the mistake had not mislead any party. In this case there was no reasonable doubt about who had been intended to be sued. The overriding objective and rule 17.4(3) could either be applied … Continue reading Gregson v Channel Four Television Corporation: CA 11 Jul 2000
The widow appealed against strike out of her claim under the 1975 Act. It had been filed with several mistakes and only just in time. Held: Her appeal succeeded. Though the defects were real and to be deplored, the paperwork contained all the necessary information: ‘The ‘quirky’ petition was filed at the Stafford County Court … Continue reading Hannigan v Hannigan: CA 18 May 2000
Appeal against re-instatement of possession proceedings after failure to attend directions hearing Judges: Sweeney J Citations: [2015] EWHC 441 (QB) Links: Bailii Statutes: Civil Procedure Rules 3.9 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Housing, Litigation Practice Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.543176
The new Civil Procedure Rules underline the existing duty which an expert owes to the Court as well as to the party which he represents. Judges: Lord Woolf MR Citations: [1999] EWCA Civ 1978 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – National Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (‘The … Continue reading Edwin John Stevens v R J Gullis and David Pile: CA 27 Jul 1999
The claimants sought an order that the defendants, an internet company in Florida, should disclose the IP address of a registered user of the site with a view to identifying the user and pursuing an action against him or her. Held: Tugendhat J said: ‘Hearings in private under CPR 39.2 (3) and orders under CPR … Continue reading G and G v Wikimedia Foundation Inc: QBD 2 Dec 2009
The formalities of committal proceedings are to be strictly observed, but a breach of the formalities may be overlooked if it does not affect the justice of the case.Lord Woolf MR considered the discretion given to a court to commit for contempt: ‘Like any other discretion, the discretion provided by the statutory provisions, must be … Continue reading Nicholls v Nicholls: CA 20 Dec 1996
The court was asked whether a school was entitled to refuse to allow a Muslim girl to wear the niqab full face veil at school. The reasons were ‘first educational factors resulting from a teacher being unable to see the face of the girl with a niqab; second the importance of a uniform policy as … Continue reading X, Regina (on the Application of) v Y School: Admn 21 Feb 2007
The procedure for making a wasted costs order was primarily compensatory, for costs wasted, rather than punitive for malpractice. The procedure is summary, and more in line with applications for costs made under the Civil Procedure Rules rule 44.3, rather than cases involving contempt of court. Usually there is no need for the judge in … Continue reading In re P (a Barrister) (Wasted Costs Order): CACD 23 Jul 2001
A judge may reopen a case even after he has delivered his final judgment. A judge invited counsel to amend his pleading to incorporate an improvement, but in the face of his repeated failure to take up the invitation, entered final judgment against him. After advice from leading counsel, counsel requested the judgment be reopened … Continue reading Stewart v Engel, BDO Stoy Hayward: CA 17 May 2000
The court gave detailed guidance on the application of the new procedures on civil appeals in private law cases introduced on May 2. Appeals from a County Court District Judge’s final decision in a multi-track case could now go straight to the Court of Appeal. Appeals will generally be subject to leave being obtained. An … Continue reading Tanfern Ltd v Cameron-MacDonald, Cameron-MacDonald: CA 12 May 2000
The claimant sought damages for injuries from 1989. His claim was pursued effectively, but a four-year delay ensued after 1994. He then sought to enlarge his claim greatly by introducing a lot of new issues of which the defendant’s insurers had no notice when they calculated the value of the claim in the early 1990s … Continue reading Dermot Gerard Richard Walsh v Andre Martin Misseldine: CA 29 Feb 2000
The court considered an application for permission to appeal. The Defendant had not attended the trial, but had applied by letter for an adjournment, which was refused. The trial proceeded and resulted in an order against the Defendant. He applied unsuccessfully under rule 39.3(3) to set the judgment aside, and he also appealed in effect … Continue reading Tennero Ltd v Arnold: QBD 6 Jul 2006
The defendant sought judicial review of his court-martial and of the confirming officers. He said the court should have heard that he committed the offence whist intixicated after taking an anti-malarial drug. The court dd not explain why it had found no causal connection beween the treatment and the offence. Held: There is no over-riding … Continue reading Regina v Ministry of Defence ex parte Colin James Murray: QBD 15 Dec 1997
Where the Court of Appeal had refused permission to apply for judicial review after a similar refusal by a judge, that decision was also, by implication, a refusal to grant permission to appeal against the judge’s decision, and there was no scope for a further appeal to the House of Lords. It is not the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Ex Parte Eastaway: HL 8 Nov 2000
(International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia) The court described the main features of the law against torture: ‘There exists today universal revulsion against torture: as a USA Court put it in Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, ‘the torturer has become, like the pirate and the slave trader before him, hostis humani generis, an enemy of all … Continue reading Prosecutor v Furundzija: 1 Apr 1999
After a judgment the parties sought to appeal. Held: The judge had failed to make a finding on a critical issue in the case, namely whether or not the mother of the child concerned had ‘even if prompted only at a subconscious level, nevertheless deliberately engaged in alienation.’ Whilst some circumstances might require an application … Continue reading In re T (a Child) (Contact: Alienation: Permission to Appeal): CA 24 Oct 2002
Where a judge, on an oral application, gave leave to appeal, but limited it to certain issues, it was not for the party on the later substantive appeal to try again to re-open issues which that judge had considered and excluded. Once leave to appeal had been granted after first written and then oral submissions, … Continue reading Fieldman and Another v Markovitch and Another: CA 4 Jul 2001
The new Civil Procedure Rules were ultra vires and invalid insofar as they purported to remove any right of a solicitor’s client to assert his right of confidence as against his solicitor. The solicitor was therefore unable in this case to defend himself against a wasted costs order, but the court could allow for the … Continue reading General Mediterranean Holdings SA v Patel and Another: QBD 19 Jul 1999
The claimant appealed against a costs order. She had previously appealed against an order of the High Court on her application for judicial review of the inquest held by the respondent. Held: The coroner, and others in a similar position should not generally be expected to pay the costs of an appeal against an order … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Davies (No 2) v HM Deputy Coroner for Birmingham: CA 27 Feb 2004
The local authority had commenced care proceedings, alleging abuse. After lengthy proceedings, of seven men and two grandparents, all but one were exonerated. The grandparents had not been entitled to legal aid, and had had to mortgage their house for legal costs. Despite being exonerated, the judge followed the normal practice of not awarding costs … Continue reading In re T (Children): SC 25 Jul 2012
The claimant was detained in a secure Mental Hospital. He complained at the seclusions policy applied by the hospital, saying that it departed from the Guidance issued for such policies by the Secretary of State under the Act. Held: The House allowed the Hospital’s appeal. The policy was lawful. Seclusion was to be seen as … Continue reading Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz: HL 13 Oct 2005
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005
The parties were involved in litigation under the 1976 Act. The claiant now appealed against an order penalising him for failing to provide a costs budget. He said that it had not been a case management conference at which one was to be filed. Judges: Hickinbottom J Citations: [2014] EWHC 1037 (Ch), [2014] WLR(D) 168 … Continue reading Kershaw v Roberts (Representative of The Estate of Jones) and Another: ChD 10 Apr 2014
The French company defendants had been ordered to disclose documents which they said might expose them to criminal prosecution in France. They now appealed. Held: The court was not obliged to make use of the Council Regulation. Orders for discovery of a document in this court (or for inspection of a document already disclosed) are … Continue reading Secretary of State for Health and Others v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others: CA 22 Oct 2013
Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court. Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. Tanfern was limited to appeals from … Continue reading Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002
The claimant had served an asset freezing order on the bank in respect of one of its customers. The bank paid out on a cheque inadvertently as to the order. The Commissioners claimed against the bank in negligence. The bank denied any duty of care. Held: The bank’s appeal succeeded. The bank owed a duty … Continue reading HM Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc: HL 21 Jun 2006
The respondent had arrived and claimed asylum. Three claims were rejected, two of which were fraudulent. She had two children by a UK citizen, and if deported the result would be (the father being unsuitable) that the children would have to return with her. Held: The mother’s appeal succeeded. The court had to consider the … Continue reading ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 1 Feb 2011
‘issues as to the application of CPR 17.4 and CPR 19.5 concerned, respectively, with amendments and the substitution of parties following the possible expiry of a relevant limitation period. The first part of the appeal concerns the approach which the court should take in circumstances where a claimant contends that the constraints to its pleaded … Continue reading Cameron Taylor Consulting Ltd and Another v Bdw Trading Ltd: CA 19 Jan 2022
The claimant anti-asbestos campaigners complained that the defendant investigators had infringed their various rights of privacy. They now sought discovery to support the claim. Held: the contents of the witness statements do show that it is more than speculative that these Claimants could, if their recollection was prompted by seeing documents, formulate a claim with … Continue reading Bains and Others v Moore and Others: QBD 15 Feb 2017
