Blogs

It is not uncommon for a losing party to be disgruntled by the outcome of his/her case. However, the majority of the time, the findings of fact which have brought a judge to their conclusion will be unimpeachable and the reasons given, whilst potentially contrary to the beliefs of the losing party, will be sufficiently…

On 19 November 2021 the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in an important decision on an employer’s liability claim for damages for personal injury suffered by an Assistant Head Teacher who was assaulted by a pupil. Dingemans LJ gave the sole reasoned judgment, with which Andrews and Arnold LJJ agreed, dismissing the Claimant’s appeal…

The Court of Appeal handed down judgment last month allowing the Defendant’s appeal against the decision of Martin Spencer J in the case of Griffiths v TUI UK Ltd. The High Court decision is discussed in the author’s blog entitled “The Limitations of Challenging Uncontroverted Expert Evidence”, which can be read here. The decision of the Court of…

The High Court recently considered the meaning of ‘trespassers’ and the relevance of a person’s state of mind and intention for the purposes of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 in the case of Ovu v London Underground Ltd [2021] EWHC 2733 (QB). Judgment was handed down on 13 October 2021. Factual Background On a freezing cold night…

In Ho v Adelekun [2021] UKSC 43, the Supreme Court considered whether and to what extent Defendants can offset ‘costs against costs’ in a QOCS case.  Overturning the Court of Appeal, both below and in Howe v MIB (No.2) [2017] EWCA Civ 932, the Supreme Court accepted that “QOCS is intended to be a complete code…

Ropewalk Chambers is ranked as a top tier set in the field of personal injury in the latest edition of the Legal 500. This is an outstanding achievement for our personal injury barristers. We have been described as offering “an excellent service together with outstanding barristers” with “a team able to advise and represent individuals…

“…it will be rare for a claim to be fundamentally dishonest without the Claimant also being fundamentally dishonest, although that might be a theoretical possibility, at least“ When Julian Knowles J made the above observation in London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (in liquidation) v Sinfield [2018] EWHC 501 (QB) it was…

The court in Covey v Harris [2021] EWHC 2211 (QB) acceded to the Defendant’s application to amend its defence to plead fundamental dishonesty made less than a month before trial. Given the court’s refusal of a similar application made by the Defendant in Mustard v Flower [2021] EWHC 846 (QB) (see Philip Davy’s blog here), one questions how…

In the context of a potentially high value claim following a road traffic accident involving a young Claimant, HHJ Walden-Smith recently refused the Claimant’s application to vacate a trial to be listed in a trial window commencing November 2021 and to stay proceedings. The case was that of Lavender v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd [2021]…

In the High Court case of Chan v (1) Peters (2) Advantage Insurance Company Ltd [2021] EWHC 2004 (QB), Cavanagh J took the opportunity to carefully distil the main principles at play when considering liability and contributory negligence in a road traffic accident case. The case concerned a 17-year-old Claimant who was struck by a car…

In an attempt to modernise an oft-labelled ‘antiquated’ justice sytem, a view more compelling in light of the difficulties faced during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has developed a programme of reform, which has been underway since 2016. The most recent measure to be introduced is the Damages Claims…

In an appeal which raises questions of a trial judge’s evidential analysis, you could be forgiven for assuming that obtaining a transcript of the evidence should be the first job on any appellant file handler’s ‘to do’ list. However, the High Court has confirmed that, in some instances, obtaining a transcript may be unnecessary for…