(1) PHILIP FREEBORN (2) CHRISTINA GOLDIE v DANIEL ROBERT DE ALMEIDA MARCAL (T/A DAN MARCAL ARCHITECTS) EWHC 3046 (TCC)QBD (TCC) 28/11/2017 Where a costs budget was filed 7 days before a CMC further to a court letter, rather than 21 days before in accordance with the CPR, there was no need
Part 36, Indemnity Costs, Inflation of Costs, Assignment of CFA (1) DOREEN MCKEOWN (2) DANIEL MCKEOWN v TANZA TOTTLE VENTON, CC (Liverpool)12/06/2017 Defendant’s late acceptance of Claimant’s Part 36 offer in low value personal injury claim which had exited portal did not give rise to entitlement to indemnity costs. Costs
WRIGHT v FIRSTGROUP PLC, QBD (Foskett J) 12/01/2018 Another case where a Claimant was granted permission to use a new expert in circumstances where their expert had changed his view following a joint meeting and to not allow a new expert would have resulted in an unfair disadvantage to the Claimant.
BRUMA v HASSAN & ANOR, QBD (Judge Curran QC) 16/01/2018 The defendants in this catastrophic RTA had done little to try to settle in circumstances where they had rejected a Part 36 offer. Indemnity costs were awarded, with 4% above base being the appropriate rate of interest under CPR r.36.17(4)(c).
BRUMA v HASSAN & ANOR, QBD (Judge Curran QC) 16/01/2018 The defendants in this catastrophic RTA had done little to try to settle in circumstances where they had rejected a Part 36 offer. Indemnity costs were awarded, with 4% above base being the appropriate rate of interest under CPR r.36.17(4)(c).
NEVILLE SPRINGER (PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF WAYNE ANTHONY SPRINGER, DECEASED) v UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS OF LEICESTER NHS TRUST [2018] EWCA Civ 436 15/03/2018 Do not forget to serve Notice of Funding as soon as possible. Rely at your peril on the words “in any event either within 7 days of entering
BROOM & ANOR v ARCHER & ORS, QBD (TCC) (Fraser J) 28/03/2018 This case highlights the importance of compliance with practice directions. A costs budget approved by the court in April 2017 had a mathematical error (which is not unusual when parties are frantically re-casting figures whilst in court). As
(1) SHAKIR ALI (2) SHAHIDA ASLAM v CHANNEL 5 BROADCAST LTD (2018) [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch) Ch D (Arnold J) 19/04/2018 CIVIL PROCEDURE – COSTS – TORTS APOLOGIES : COSTS : COSTS BUDGETS : ESTOPPEL : MISUSE OF PRIVATE INFORMATION : PART 36 OFFERS : STATEMENTS IN OPEN COURT :
(1) SHAKIR ALI (2) SHAHIDA ASLAM v CHANNEL 5 BROADCAST LTD [2018] EWHC 840 Ch D (Arnold J) 19/04/2018 The Claimants, in this misuse of private information case, had been successful, but had failed to beat a Part 36 offer (which in turn had failed to include/provide an apology). The lack
BARRY FREDERICK HEWES v (1) WEST HERTFORDSHIRE HOSPITALS NHS TRUST (2) EAST OF ENGLAND AMBULANCE SERVICE NHS TRUST (3) PANKAJ TANNA [2018] EWHC 2715 QBD 18/10/2018 The case concerns a client with cauda equina syndrome (CES) where there was an alleged delay in surgery leading to permanent bowel and bladder dysfunction. It
OBI v PATEL & ANOR (2018) QBD (Judge Cotter QC) 08/10/2018 Permission to rely on expert evidence in a PI quantum trial arising out of a road traffic accident was refused where the defendant had delayed, for tactical reasons, notifying the claimant of his intention to use expert evidence, and the
FINANCIAL CONDUCT AUTHORITY v (1) DA VINCI INVEST LTD (2) DA VINCI INVEST PTE LTD (3) MINEWORLD LTD (4) SZABOLCS BANYA (5) GYORGY SZABOLCS BRAD (6) TAMAS PORNYE (7) BIVONAS LAW LLP, Ch D (Nugee J) 10/12/2018 The Financial Conduct Authority proposed to discontinue claim against defendant law firm and declined
ROBERTS v FRESSE & ANOR QBD, 18/12/2018 A case where relief from sanction was granted to Defendants to a PI claim despite their failure to file expert reports in time or to provide medical evidence supporting their explanation that the failure had been caused by the conducting solicitor’s mental ill health –
Conduct designed to convince, rather than deceive, is not fundamental dishonesty. Whilst there had been a degree of overstatement, there had been no faking of injury – SPENCER SMITH v ASHWELL MAINTENANCE LTD CC (Leicester) 23/01/2019
An intersting case highlighting the real difficulties lawyers and medical experts face in medico-legal reporting. Solicitors require the best medical opinion available for their clients. Medical experts undertake medico-legal work outside of and in addition to their NHS and private clinics. It is overtime work for professionals already working overtime…