Posts from Boodle Hatfield

Complying with CPR 7.5: has Jones v Chichester Harbour clarified the position?

The interplay between CPR 7.5 and CPR 6.14 has been considered in a number of cases concerning valid service of a claim form, most recently in Jones v Chichester Harbour Conservancy and others.

Practical implications of the SRA three-year strategy

On 27 July 2017, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) launched a consultation on its new three-year corporate strategy for 2017-2020, which is open until 21 September.

Does one size fit all? A commentary on the new Pre-action Protocol for Debt Claims

What’s changing? The new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims comes into force on 1 October 2017 and will apply to any debt claimed by a business (including sole traders and public bodies) from an individual (including a sole trader). It does not affect business-to-business debts (unless the debtor is a sole trader) or where the … Continue reading Does one size fit all? A commentary on the new Pre-action Protocol for Debt Claims

Can a litigant in person delegate the service of a claim form and particulars of claim to an unregistered barrister?

Perhaps surprisingly, given that one would assume that service of a claim form and particulars of claim is a reserved legal activity under the Legal Services Act 2007 (LSA 2007), the answer to this question appears to be yes.

Second time lucky? Hall v Elia: successive court applications

As the proverb goes, “if at first you don’t succeed, try, try, try again”. Unfortunately, in the case of Hall and another v Elia and another, the message from the High Court is: don’t try to apply again, unless there has been a material change in circumstances since the original decision.

Altering draft judgments: is that your final answer Your Honour?

The trial is over, judgment has been reserved and those involved await the result with anticipation. But what can be done when the decision arrives in the form of a draft judgment and you believe the judgment is defective?

Early engagement between the parties on the scope of expert evidence and the methodology to be used is crucial

Following the hearing of an interim application in the case of UPL Europe Limited v Agchemaccess Chemicals Limited, Chief Master Marsh has given some guidance on the obligations of litigants where expert evidence is permitted. This guidance will be particularly useful where expert technical or scientific analysis is required, but it is also of more … Continue reading Early engagement between the parties on the scope of expert evidence and the methodology to be used is crucial

Whether creditors can use the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998 to recover the costs of collecting a debt years after payment

The Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998 (the Act) operates to insert an implied term in business to business contracts for the supply of goods and services for interest on a qualifying debt, plus an additional fixed sum.

A long way from Norwich: Jurisdiction in NPOs revisited

As the area of law surrounding Norwich Pharmacal Orders (NPOs) has grown in recent years, applications for an NPO in situations where the respondent resides outside the jurisdiction has come under increasing scrutiny. The recent High Court case of AB Bank Ltd v Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC [2016] EWHC 2082 (Comm) has provided a … Continue reading A long way from Norwich: Jurisdiction in NPOs revisited

When might a non-party costs order be made against those who fund defences?

Non-party costs orders against those who have funded defences are more unusual than orders made against those who have funded claims. The recent judgment in the case of The Creative Foundation v Dreamland Leisure Limited has contributed to the developing law in this area and sheds light on when an order might be made.

A reminder that issuing proceedings (even if those proceedings are not served) has cost consequences

As we all know, the court has discretion on the question of costs. Section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 provides that “the costs of and incidental to all proceedings in … the High Court … are in the discretion of the court” and CPR 7.2(1) provides that “proceedings are started when the court … Continue reading A reminder that issuing proceedings (even if those proceedings are not served) has cost consequences

Webb v Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust: when is a winner not a winner?

“It is a sad fact that the provisions of Part 36, intended to promote settlement of litigation, and thus to minimise costs, have themselves been productive of numerous appeals to this Court, and in consequence substantial costs in what is effectively satellite litigation.” This quote is from the beginning of Sir Stanley Burnton’s judgment in … Continue reading Webb v Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust: when is a winner not a winner?

What should you do if your opponent makes a procedural error?

Napoléon Bonaparte: “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.” As litigators, we generally regard it our overriding duty to obtain the best possible result for our clients by (within reason) every means available to us. However, the duty to our clients is tempered in several respects. One of the quandaries that can, … Continue reading What should you do if your opponent makes a procedural error?

What can you do if a judge does not properly address and decide the issues?

In two recent cases in which judgment was given a day apart (The Gulf Agencies v Ahmed and Clydesdale Bank v John Workman) the Court of Appeal overturned the decisions of the first instance judges and severely criticised them for the manner in which they reached their decisions. In both cases, the first instance judges … Continue reading What can you do if a judge does not properly address and decide the issues?

Cook v Virgin Media and McNeil v Tesco: court invokes doctrine of forum non conveniens of its own volition

Whenever the court makes an order of its own volition, it serves as a reminder of how wide the court’s discretion is when it comes to exercising its case management powers. We must always bear this in mind, and advise our clients that the court could independently make an order that neither party may have … Continue reading Cook v Virgin Media and McNeil v Tesco: court invokes doctrine of forum non conveniens of its own volition