REUTERS | Denis Balibouse

The Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) do not expressly prohibit a second action where a first action based on many of the same facts and claim has not been successful; in fact CPR 3.4(4) seems to envisage that possibility. However, there are established cases which provide guidance on when a second claim will be held as an abuse of process. It will depend on whether the first action was struck out for failure to comply with procedure, decided at court or settled between the parties. Continue reading

REUTERS | Aly Song

In recent years, third party funding has gradually entered the mainstream in English litigation. Arrangements that would once have been struck down as offending against public policy, in the form of the historic rules against trafficking in litigation known as champerty and maintenance, are now accepted and indeed endorsed by lawyers and judges. Continue reading

REUTERS | Dominic Ebenbichler

The scenario: the receiving party serves a bill for £75,000 and commences proceedings for detailed assessment under CPR 47. 6. In view of the sum involved, the bill is referred for provisional assessment under CPR 47.15 and Practice Direction (PD) 47.14.1. The bill is assessed by the judge at £72,000. Sealed offers lodged under PD 47.14.3(d) are subsequently considered. They reveal that the receiving party offered to accept £71,999, so the offer has been beaten by a whisker. Continue reading

REUTERS | George Frey

For any motor insurance company looking for suitable New Year’s resolutions, it may be worth considering the cautionary tale of Southern Rock Insurance Company Limited v Hadar Hafeez. This Scottish case illustrates an important practical difficulty that arises from doing business online, particularly via price comparison websites. It also shows the importance of making sure that the questions asked in the proposal form (as well as the answers given) are retained in full. Continue reading

REUTERS | Dylan Martinez

Costs budgeting, as we know it today, has been around for less than four years. It was only last June in Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust that the Court of Appeal provided much needed clarification on the approach to be adopted by costs judges on detailed assessment on departing from approved or agreed budgets, if there is good reason to do so. Continue reading

REUTERS | Grigory Dukor

In the words of children’s author Norton Juster, “Expect everything so that nothing comes unexpected.” With that in mind, and as we all breathe a collective sigh of relief at having survived 2017, it is time to usher in another year with a look ahead at what dispute resolution developments can be expected in the coming 12 months.

What follows is a brief overview. For full details, be sure to check our new what to expect in 2018 articleContinue reading

REUTERS | Ralph Orlowski

In Orexim Trading Ltd v Mahavir Port and Terminal Private Ltd and others, the court held that Practice Direction (PD) 6B paragraph 3.1(20)(a) was to be interpreted narrowly. A claim under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 did not fall within it simply because it was made pursuant to an enactment. The court stated it would follow Re Harrods (BA) and Banco Nacional de Cuba and the interpretation adopted there in respect of Order 11, rule 1(2)(b) of the Rules of the Supreme Court (RSC). Continue reading

REUTERS | Gary Hershorn

In an earlier post in this blog, CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LPP, solicitors for the successful appellants in Premier Motorauctions Ltd (in liquidation) and another v PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and Lloyds Bank Plc championed the decision of the Court of Appeal for bringing the pendulum of authorities on the interplay between security for costs and after the event (ATE) insurance “to rest in a more balanced position.” Continue reading

REUTERS | David W Cerny

As another year draws to a close, the Practical Law Dispute Resolution blog must pause for a short Christmas recess. We will be back on Wednesday 27 December 2017.

If, however, you are looking for a new holiday tradition to accompany your turkey dinner, Queen’s Speech and wassailing, why not indulge in our annual top ten tips? It has been compiled by our expert team to bring you some of the most interesting nuggets of wisdom arising from key cases over the past 12 months.

Only two things remain before we wrap up and tie a ribbon around 2017. Firstly, thank you to all of our contributors for their excellent posts this year. Finally, on behalf of Practical Law Dispute Resolution, we wish our readers and contributors a very Merry Christmas and a happy, successful 2018.

Practical Law Dispute Resolution Jack Meek
REUTERS | Paulo Whitaker

Regular readers of the Practical Law Dispute Resolution blog may recall my previous posts about the County Court Money Claims Centre (CCMCC) in Salford. The CCMCC processes hundreds of thousands of Part 7 money claims (plus related applications) each year. In addition, over the past 12 months, it has processed tens of thousands of charging order and attachment of earnings applications, following the centralisation of these enforcement methods in 2016.

I was fortunate to have the chance to return to the CCMCC this summer, to learn more about practice and procedure at Salford – especially in relation to charging orders, attachment of earnings and Help with Fees. Following on from last year’s Sailing through the CCMCC, this blog contains a further and updated collection of practical hints and tips for those who use the CCMCC on a regular or occasional basis. Continue reading