Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group
|
|
- Estella Rose
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #78 19 April 2018 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T F Page 1
2 Welcome to Insight In this week s edition of Insight, we will be covering cases relating to: Trying to settle RTA Portal cases without paying costs An allegation that part of a claim was fundamentally dishonest Indemnity costs where a ground of appeal was not pursued Malcolm Henke Partner & Head of LACIG Trying to settle RTA portal claims without paying costs Judgment has been handed down in the appeal in Gavin Edmondson Solicitors Limited v Haven Insurance Company Limited (2018) UKSC 21. Six claimants were involved in road traffic accidents involving vehicles insured by the appellant insurance company. They all entered into CFAs with the respondent solicitors firm, which notified the claims via the RTA online claims portal. Each claim was acknowledged by the insurer, which then made offers to compromise the claims on an inclusive basis, direct to the claimants. All of the individuals eventually accepted these offers and cancelled their CFAs with the solicitors. The solicitors claimed against the appellant for the fixed costs which they should have recovered had the claims been settled in accordance with the portal pre-action protocol. The claim was dismissed at first instance, but the Court of Appeal allowed the solicitors appeal in respect of their claim based on equitable interference. Before the UKSC, the appellant insurer repeated its main submission that the retainers created no contractual liability to pay the charges upon which an equitable lien or charge could be founded, and submitted that the Court of Appeal had been wrong to extend the equity of intervention as it did, the extension being contrary to settled principle....the respondents were entitled to the enforcement of the traditional equitable lien against the appellant... Dismissing the appeal, (on different grounds from those in the Court of Appeal) the UKSC held unanimously that the respondents were entitled to the enforcement of the traditional equitable lien against the appellant, as the client owed a contractual duty to pay the solicitors charges. However, the equitable lien should not have been modernised in the manner undertaken by the Court of Appeal. As the case law demonstrated, the solicitor s equitable lien was developed to promote access to justice. It enabled Page 2
3 solicitors to offer litigation services on credit to clients who, although they have a meritorious case, lacked the financial resources to pay up front for its pursuit. The equitable lien depended upon (i) the client having a liability to the solicitor for his charges; (ii) there being something in the nature of a fund in which equity could recognise that the solicitor had a claim (usually a debt owed by the defendant to the solicitor s client which owed its existence to the solicitor s services to the client); and (iii) something sufficiently affecting the conscience of the payer at the time of payment, either in the form of collusion with the client to cheat the solicitor or notice or knowledge of the solicitor s claim against or interest in the fund. The client care letter, which explained that the solicitor would be able to recover its costs from the losing side if the claimants won, so that the claimants would not need to put their hands in their own pockets, did not mean that the claimants were not contractually liable for the solicitors fees. It merely limited the recourse from which the respondent could satisfy that liability to the amount of its recoveries from the defendant, and it both preserved and affirmed the client s basic contractual liability. This was a sufficient foundation for the lien to operate as a security for payment, on a limited recourse basis. As such, the lien could be enforced against the appellant by requiring it to pay the fee amounts in the CFAs direct to the respondent, but only up to the amount of the agreed settlement payments. To that limited extent the order made by the Court of Appeal needed to be varied. It was not strictly necessary to address the Court of Appeal s approach in view of the decision on the traditional principle above, but the correctness or otherwise of the Court of Appeal s reformulation of the principle had been extensively argued, and the Law Society had intervened to support it. There were insuperable obstacles to extending the principle to cases where, although there was no contractual liability for the charges, the Protocol was breached. This included the fact that the Protocol was purely voluntary and created no debt or other relevant legal rights at all. Whilst equitable remedies were flexible, they still operated according to principle. One of the principles of the equitable lien was that the client must have a responsibility for the solicitor s charges. There was no general principle that equity would protect solicitors from any unconscionable interference with their expectations in relation to recovery of their charges. In all the cases before the court, the requirement that the settlement debts owed their creation to the respondent s services provided to the claimants under the CFAs was satisfied on the facts. The respondent s actions in logging the claim on the portal contributed to the settlement in two ways. First, it supplied the details of the claim to the insurer, and second, it demonstrated the claimant s serious intention to pursue the claim, and ability to do so with the benefit of a CFA. Once a defendant or his insurer was notified that a claimant in a road traffic accident case had retained solicitors under a CFA, and that the solicitors were proceeding under the Protocol, they had the requisite notice and knowledge to make a subsequent payment of settlement monies direct to the claimant unconscionable, as an interference with the solicitor s interest in the fruits of the litigation. Comment Although this judgment does not explicitly prevent insurers from contacting or approaching claimants direct, it makes clear that where details of a claim come via a solicitor, that solicitor will be entitled to recover the charges and fixed the costs that are payable under the pre -action protocol applicable to the claim. In this case, the appellant had notice of the lien because it knew that each of the claimants had retained the respondent under a CFA, and also knew that the respondent was looking to the fruits of the claim for recovery of its charges. Page 3
4 Fundamental Dishonesty Wright v Satellite Information Services Limited (2018) EWHC 812 (QB) related to the defendant s appeal against the award to the claimant of 119, in damages for personal injury, with the defendant to pay 75% of the claimant s costs. The defendant argued that the claim should have been dismissed pursuant to S57 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 on the basis that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. The claim arose out of an accident at work on 24th January The claimant, who was then aged 66, sustained injuries affecting his right lower limb. He was unable to return to work post-accident. The defendant admitted liability. Quantum remained in issue and fell to be determined by the court. It was the defendant's case that covert video surveillance had produced evidence that the claimant was far less disabled than he claimed and that he had deliberately and dishonestly exaggerated his claim. The trial judge identified that there were some real inconsistencies in the claimant's case, including as to how far he was able to walk; to what extent he needed to use a walking stick and the level of pain that he suffered. Having identified the defendant s concerns, particularly in regard to a care claim, the judge conducted a detailed analysis of all the evidence and the various elements of the claim before making a finding that the claimant was not guilty of dishonesty, still less dishonesty of a fundamental nature. The claim for future care had been pleaded in excess of 73,000. The judge allowed just 2,100 to cover the provision of some care following future surgery. Otherwise, he concluded that there was no true continuing care need. The defendant contended that the claimant's witness statements and his accounts given to the medical experts gave the impression that he had a significant ongoing claim for personal care whereas the judge found that he needed only minimal support. The claimant claimed for a significant amount of care when in fact he had no ongoing requirement for care. The defendant argued that the claimant signed the statement of truth on the schedule of loss and in doing so, when he would later admit in cross-examination that he had no ongoing need for care, the only possible conclusion was that he was dishonest. Dismissing the appeal, the High Court judge held that the claimant did not labour the point as far as his care claim was concerned in his later witness statements. In a statement dated February 2016, which was subsequently amended and re-dated April 2016, he simply stated that he still required assistance from his wife and remained unable to do domestic chores that were his before the accident. In his statement dated June 2016 he said that he still required assistance, especially with washing and that his wife still did all of the domestic chores. His wife's statement from the same time said that she continued to do "the vast majority of the household chores". She now did the gardening. The claimant coped with dressing although it took longer. He still required help with showering. She said that she was concerned for the future knowing that there would be periods after surgery when she would need to "be there for him and to care for him.". It appeared that the claimant had been broadly consistent in what he had said in relation to any need for ongoing assistance. The trial judge accepted that the claimant s wife might occasionally do tasks for him such as reaching Page 4
5 items out of a cupboard and that she would be present to provide support while he was showering. That fitted with what the claimant had said. The rejection of the care claim as pleaded seemed to have flowed from a proper analysis of what was actually being done for the claimant and the conclusion that this did not properly sound in damages. The judge concluded that "it is almost impossible in my view to value such occasional assistance."...in finding that the claimant had not established his claim for future care, the judge was not bound to find that the claimant had acted dishonestly merely in presenting such a claim Read in the context of the evidence and the way in which the claim was presented in the schedule of loss, it was clear that in finding that the claimant had not established his claim for future care, the judge was not bound to find that the claimant had acted dishonestly merely in presenting such a claim. The reason for the judge's rejection of this element of the claim was not that he found the claimant's evidence to be untruthful, but rather that a proper interpretation of that evidence did not support the assessment made by the care expert. The judge was not wrong in not treating the failure to establish the care claim as amounting to a finding of dishonesty. The issue of dishonesty was a prominent part of the trial. It was apparent that the judge had that issue at the forefront of his mind throughout. Looking at the transcripts of the evidence of the claimant and his wife, it was quite clear that the judge was interested in and focused on inconsistencies in the evidence which might support a finding of dishonesty. There were clearly matters which caused the judge some concern but a full analysis of all the evidence led him to find that the claimant had not been dishonest. Comment On a separate point, the appellate judge was highly critical of the schedule of loss prepared for and signed by the claimant. His criticism places under the spotlight the extent to which claimants fully understand the documents they are required to sign when making a claim. With the exception of the claim for loss of earnings the schedule of loss did not serve its intended purpose of setting out clearly the claimant s case. The judge stated that it was very important that lawyers draft schedules in such a way that the facts to which their client was attesting were clear (which was not the case here). Failing to do so was failing in their duty both to the client and to the court. This appeal was essentially a challenge to the trial judge's findings of fact. The first stage for the court when considering an application under S57 was to decide whether, on a balance of probabilities, the defendant had established that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest in relation to the primary claim, or a related claim. The judge was not satisfied that was the case. On the facts and the evidence presented to him, it could not be said that this was not a decision open to him. The issue of dishonesty was akin to a jury question. In the case of a civil trial before a judge alone, it was a matter for the trial judge who had seen and heard all the evidence unless some material flaw in approach or his analysis could be identified. Page 5
6 Indemnity costs where a principal ground of appeal was not pursued The case of Secretary of State for the Home Department v Barry (2018) EWCA Civ 790 is of relevance on a narrow but important point on costs. Having lost its case before the First Tier Tribunal, the appellant Secretary of State also lost its first appeal to the Upper Tribunal. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant s further appeal. It was agreed that, in the circumstances, the appellant should have to pay the respondent's costs. The respondent applied for those costs to be awarded on an indemnity basis. The relevant test for present purposes was whether the conduct of a party was "unreasonable to a high degree". In this context "unreasonable" did not mean merely wrong or misguided in hindsight. The respondent submitted that the appellant had made a serious allegation against the Upper Tribunal, suggesting that the present case was not an isolated instance but potentially raised a "systemic" failure on the part of that tribunal to correct obvious errors of law by the First Tier Tribunal. It was argued that the appellant, unlike most litigants before this court, had access to statistical and other information which would tend to support or refute that suggestion of a systemic problem. The appellant failed to place any such evidence before this court. Having obtained permission to appeal on that basis, the appellant abandoned the argument without explanation. The appellant accepted that it should have made clear at an earlier stage that the "systemic failure" argument was no longer to be pursued. Some three years had passed by the time the appeal came to a substantive hearing and the appellant had taken the view that there was no longer any basis for asserting that there might be a more systemic issue. It was accepted that this should have been made clear to the respondent and the court but it was submitted that the real issue in this case was whether a party who obtained permission on one basis (but not the sole basis) was entitled to continue in an appeal when circumstances changed after the grant of permission and it decided not to pursue a certain aspect of it. appellant s conduct, then indemnity costs should not be awarded. Having obtained permission on (a particular) basis, the appellant failed either to make the submission good with evidence or to pursue the argument Finding in favour of the respondent, the Court of Appeal held that the fundamental point which the appellant s argument failed to meet was that this was a second appeal. The well known criteria for a second appeal were much more stringent than for a first appeal. It was also clear that, on the facts of this case, there was no issue of general importance other than the suggestion that there was a "systemic" problem in the Upper Tribunal. That was an unusual allegation and a serious one. That was clearly the basis on which permission to appeal had been granted. Having obtained permission on that basis, the appellant failed either to make the submission good with evidence or to pursue the argument. The appellant abandoned it without even explaining why. In all the circumstances of this case, the appellant's conduct was indeed unreasonable to a high degree and costs would be awarded on an indemnity basis. Comment The simple message to be taken from this case is that if permission is obtained to appeal a decision on a particular ground, there is a very real risk that if that ground is not pursued and the appeal is lost, indemnity costs will be awarded. Unless the continued appeal was hopeless, or where the respondent was put to additional costs because of the Page 6
7 Disclaimer & Copyright Notice The contents of this document are considered accurate at the time of delivery. The information provided does not constitute specific legal advice. You should always consult a suitably qualified solicitor about any individual legal matter. Horwich Farrelly Solicitors accepts no liability for errors or omissions in this document. All rights reserved. This material provided is for personal use only. No part may be distributed to any other party without the prior written permission of Horwich Farrelly Solicitors or the copyright holder. No part may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical photocopying, microfilming, recording, scanning or otherwise for commercial purposes without the written permission of Horwich Farrelly or the copyright holder. Horwich Farrelly 2018 Page 7
Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group
Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #26 11 August 2016 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome to
More informationI Fought the Law ANDREW HOGAN
I Fought the Law ANDREW HOGAN 1 It has been cynically observed in the author s presence, that insurance companies only care about fraud and costs, and only about care about the latter because they regard
More informationInsight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group
Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #27 01 September 2016 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome
More informationInsight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group
Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #19 17 June 2016 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome to this
More informationJUDGMENT. Gavin Edmondson Solicitors Limited (Respondent/Cross-Appellant) v Haven Insurance Company Limited (Appellant/Cross-Respondent)
Easter Term [2018] UKSC 21 On appeal from: [2015] EWCA Civ 1230 JUDGMENT Gavin Edmondson Solicitors Limited (Respondent/Cross-Appellant) v Haven Insurance Company Limited (Appellant/Cross-Respondent) before
More informationSolicitor/client costs
Solicitor/client costs Judith Ayling 15 May 2018 Getting the retainer wrong Radford v Frade [2016] EWHC 1600 (QB), [2016] 4 Costs L.O. 653 (Warby J, on appeal from Master Haworth) The appellants submitted
More informationInsight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group
Insight from Horwich Farrelly s Large & Complex Injury Group Issue #83 08 June 2018 Alexander House 94 Talbot Road Manchester M16 0SP T. 03300 240 711 F. 03300 240 712 www.h-f.co.uk Page 1 Welcome to Insight
More informationBefore : LORD JUSTICE MCFARLANE LORD JUSTICE BRIGGS and LORD JUSTICE FLAUX Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWCA Civ 355 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM CARDIFF CIVIL AND FAMILY JUSTICE CENTRE District Judge T M Phillips b44ym322 Before : Case No: A2/2016/1422
More informationRTA Post Jackson How to deal with them 3 months on what have we learned?
www.clerksroom.com Administration: Equity House Blackbrook Park Avenue Taunton Somerset TA1 2PX DX: 97188 Taunton Blackbrook T: 0845 083 3000 F: 0845 083 3001 mail@clerksroom.com www.clerksroom.com RTA
More informationThe rules and background to fundamental dishonesty Ben Handy, St John s Chambers
The rules and background to fundamental dishonesty Ben Handy, St John s Chambers Published on 3 rd February 2016 What is fundamental dishonesty? Simply, dishonesty that is fundamental! It is not defined
More informationCuthbert v Gair (t/a The Bowes Manor Equestrian Centre) [2008] APP.L.R. 09/03
JUDGMENT : Master Haworth : Costs Court. 3 rd September 2008 1. This is an appeal pursuant to CPR Rule 47.20 from a decision of Costs Officer Martin in relation to a detailed assessment which took place
More informationAUCKLAND DISTRICT LAW SOCIETY INC. JAMIE WAUGH- BARRISTER TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT
AUCKLAND DISTRICT LAW SOCIETY INC. JAMIE WAUGH- BARRISTER TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR INSTRUCTING SOLICITORS AND CLIENTS Currently, with limited exceptions, as a barrister I am required
More informationPERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS
PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS Frequently Asked Questions 1. Can I make a claim? If you have been injured because of the fault of someone else, you can claim financial compensation through the courts. 2. Who can
More informationThe Labour Relations Agency Arbitration Scheme. Guide to the Scheme
The Labour Relations Agency Arbitration Scheme Guide to the Scheme Labour Relations Agency The Labour Relations Agency is an independent, publicly funded organisation. Our job is to promote good employment
More informationPERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS
PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS Frequently Asked Questions 1. Can I make a claim? If you have been injured because of the fault of someone else, you can claim financial compensation through the courts. The dependants
More informationDeveloping case law and tactics. Rachel Russell, Barrister, St John s Chambers
Developing case law and tactics Rachel Russell, Barrister, St John s Chambers Case law What guidance is offered by authority on the issue of fundamental dishonesty? In respect of both definition and practical
More informationDefence and Counterclaim Training. By Andrew Mckie Barrister Clerksroom.
Defence and Counterclaim Training. By Andrew Mckie Barrister Clerksroom Email andrewmckie@btinternet.com/ mckie@clerksroom.com Telephone Mobile: 07739 964012 Office: 0845 083 3000 Website www.clerksroom.com
More informationPractice Guideline 9: Guideline for Arbitrators on Making Orders Relating to the Costs of the Arbitration
Practice Guideline 9: Guideline for Arbitrators on Making Orders Relating to the Costs of the Arbitration 1. Introduction 1.1 One of the most difficult and important functions which an arbitrator has to
More informationBe Careful and Honest in What You Say: Fraud in Arbitration
Be Careful and Honest in What You Say: Fraud in Arbitration by Vincent Moran QC Vincent Moran QC acted for the successful Claimant in Celtic v Knowles, the first reported decision under the 1996 Arbitration
More informationClinical Negligence: Following Investigation
Clinical Negligence: Following Investigation 2 Your guide to Clinical Negligence: Following Investigation About Us From protecting your family legacy to securing your business future, we work tirelessly
More informationWorking at Height Seminar. The Kube, Leicester Racecourse 4 October 2018
Working at Height Seminar The Kube, Leicester Racecourse 4 October 2018 Introduction Keoghs National defendant-focused, top 100 law firm, acting for leading insurers, businesses and suppliers to the insurance
More informationPrivately Funded Civil Litigation CFAs and DBAs Frequently Asked Questions
Privately Funded Civil Litigation CFAs and DBAs Frequently Asked Questions Updated October 2017 The Bar Council frequently receives enquiries from barristers and clerks in relation to Conditional Fee Agreements
More informationCivil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92
New South Wales Civil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 No 92 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Amendment of Civil Liability Act 2002 No 22 2 4 Consequential repeals
More informationJudicial Review: proposals for reform
: proposals for reform Response to the Ministry of Justice Consultation January 2013 Child Poverty Action Group 94 White Lion Street London N1 9PF www.cpag.org.uk Introduction 1. The Child Poverty Action
More informationJustice Committee Civil Litigation (Expenses and Group Proceedings) (Scotland) Bill Written submission from Thompsons Solicitors Scotland
Introduction Justice Committee Civil Litigation (Expenses and Group Proceedings) (Scotland) Bill Written submission from Thompsons Solicitors Scotland 1. Thompsons Solicitors are one of Scotland s largest
More informationMR ANDREW GRAEME WARING. and MR MARK MCDONNELL. Judgment. 1. On 14 June 2016, the claimant and defendant were cycling in opposite directions on Lodge
IN THE COUNTY COURT AT BRIGHTON CLAIM NO: D60YJ743 Brighton County and Family Court William Street Brighton BN2 0RF BEFORE HER HONOUR JUDGE VENN BETWEEN MR ANDREW GRAEME WARING Claimant and MR MARK MCDONNELL
More informationLEGAL SCHEME REGULATIONS. These Regulations came into force on 1 October 2017
LEGAL SCHEME REGULATIONS These Regulations came into force on 1 October 2017 1 Introduction 1.1 These Regulations govern the Union s Legal Scheme. The Rules of the Union set out your other rights and entitlements.
More informationRULE 1.15: SAFEKEEPING PROPERTY. Professional Responsibility
RULE 1.15: SAFEKEEPING PROPERTY Professional Responsibility RULE 1.15: SAFEKEEPING PROPERTY (a) A lawyer shall hold property of clients or third persons that is in a lawyer's possession in connection with
More informationMatters relevant to allocation to a track
1 Credit Hire and Storage: Post Jackson Things You Need to Know Andrew Mckie, Barrister Clerksroom -August 2013 Telephone 07739 964012/ 0845 083 3000 Email: andrewmckie@btinternet.com/ mckie@clerksroom.com
More informationMOTOR FRAUD BRIEFING
Simon Trigger Francesca O Neill January 2019 Author Author MOTOR FRAUD BRIEFING In this edition of our Motor Fraud Briefing, Francesca O Neill and Simon Trigger discuss and comment on recent important
More informationHealth and Care Professions Tribunal Service PRACTICE NOTE. Finding that Fitness to Practise is Impaired
Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service PRACTICE NOTE Finding that Fitness to Practise is Impaired This Practice Note has been issued by the Council for the Guidance of Panels and to assist those
More informationWHEN A CLAIM FALLS OUT OF THE PROTOCOL, WHO WINS?
WHEN A CLAIM FALLS OUT OF THE PROTOCOL, WHO WINS? 1. On 20 April 2016 Deputy District Judge Cooksley sitting at Peterborough County Court granted both parties permission to appeal the assessment of costs
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN. PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD & TOBAGO) LIMITED
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. CV 2014-00133 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN PRIME EQUIPMENT RENTALS LIMITED Claimant AND ANAND SINGH Defendant AND THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRINIDAD
More informationPractical Tips for Possession: The View from the Housing Possession Duty Desk and Exceptional Funding under LASPO
Practical Tips for Possession: The View from the Housing Possession Duty Desk and Exceptional Funding under LASPO 23 May 2013 Exceptional Funding Under LASPO the housing law perspective Paper produced
More informationConditional Fee Agreement (CFA) Additional Explanatory Notes Law Society Conditions (as amended)
Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA) Additional Explanatory Notes Law Society Conditions (as amended) The amended Law Society Conditions below form part of your Conditional Fee Agreement. You should read the
More informationLIMITATION running the defence
LIMITATION running the defence Oliver Moore, Guildhall Chambers 9 th June 2010 SECTION 11 (4) LIMITATION ACT 1980 the period applicable is three years from (a) date on which cause of action accrued; or
More informationOnline Case 8 Parvez. Mooney Everett Solicitors Ltd
125 Online Case 8 Parvez v Mooney Everett Solicitors Ltd [2018] 1 Costs LO 125 Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWHC 62 (QB) High Court of Justice, Queen s Bench Division, Sheffield District Registry 19
More informationYour jargon buster for your litigation case.
Your jargon buster for your litigation case. Your guide to litigation. dbslaw.co.uk 0800 157 7055 Birmingham - Nottingham Contents Page Introduction Court Process Preliminaries Pre-Issue and Trying to
More informationSOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No and. Before:
SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No. 11207-2013 BETWEEN: SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY Applicant and JOANNE ELIZABETH COUGHLAN Respondent Before: Mr R. Nicholas
More informationLOWIN. and W PORTSMOUTH & CO. JUDGMENT (As Approved)
[2016] EWHC 2301 (QB) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION Case No: QB/2016/0049 The Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Monday, 20 June 2016 BEFORE: MRS JUSTICE ELISABETH LAING
More informationAgreement for the Supply of Legal Services by a Barrister at Three New Square
Agreement for the Supply of Legal Services by a Barrister at Three New Square The Barrister and the Solicitor agree that the Barrister will supply the Services for the benefit of the Lay Client on the
More informationMijin Kim THE NAME AND ANY INFORMATION IDENTIFYING THE COMPLAINANT IS NOT TO BE PUBLISHED DECISION
BEFORE THE IMMIGRATION ADVISERS COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL Decision No: [2015] NZIACDT 73 Reference No: IACDT 014/15 IN THE MATTER of a referral under s 48 of the Immigration Advisers Licensing
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Manchester Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 6 th February 2015 On 16 th February Before
IAC-AH-DN/DH-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: IA/13752/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Manchester Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 6 th February 2015 On 16 th February
More informationLegal Business. Overview Of Court Procedure. Memoranda on legal and business issues and concerns for multiple industry and business communities
Memoranda on legal and business issues and concerns for multiple industry and business communities Overview Of Court Procedure 1 Rajah & Tann 4 Battery Road #26-01 Bank of China Building Singapore 049908
More informationTERMS AND CONDITIONS OF TRADE
BONEDA PTY LTD TRADING AS GROOVE TILES & STONE A.B.N 252 484 506 27 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF TRADE 1. INTERPRETATION 1.1 Unless otherwise inconsistent with the context the word person shall include a corporation;
More informationThe ABTA Arbitration Scheme Rules
23 rd May 2016 The ABTA Arbitration Scheme Rules 1. Introduction 1.1 This Scheme is supplied exclusively by CEDR, Europe s leading independent dispute resolution service. 1.2 The Scheme has been designed
More informationAgreement for the Supply of Legal Services by a Barrister in a Commercial Case
Agreement for the Supply of Legal Services by a Barrister in a Commercial Case The Barrister and the Solicitor agree that the Barrister will supply the Services for the benefit of the Lay Client on the
More informationBefore : EDWARD MURRAY (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) Between :
Neutral Citation Number: [2018] EWHC 534 (Ch) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION Case No: HC-2016-003081 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 16 March 2018 Before : EDWARD
More informationZurich Insurance Company PLC -V- Colin Hayward. Patrick Limb QC Jayne Adams QC
Zurich Insurance Company PLC -V- Colin Hayward Patrick Limb QC Jayne Adams QC 1. The Supreme Court today handed down judgment in Zurich -v- Hayward. This has been a Ropewalk Chambers case throughout, Jayne
More informationGENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS
GENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS PART 44 PART 44 Contents of this Part Rule 44.1 Rule 44.2 Rule 44.3 Rule 44.3A Rule 44.3B Rule 44.3C Rule 44.4 Rule 44.5 Rule 44.6 Rule 44.7 Rule 44.8 Rule 44.9 Rule 44.10 Rule
More informationLondon Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) -v- Sinfield [2018] EWHC 51 QB MARTIN FERGUSON
London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) -v- Sinfield [2018] EWHC 51 QB MARTIN FERGUSON 1 London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) -v- Sinfield
More informationUNIT 15 - Civil Litigation. Suggested Answers June 2010
UNIT 15 - Civil Litigation Suggested Answers June 2010 Note to Candidates and Tutors: The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationIn cases where there is no Protocol in place then parties are expected to abide by the guidelines set down in Section III of the PDPAC and Annex A.
LEVEL 6 UNIT 15 CIVIL LITIGATION SUGGESTED ANSWERS JUNE 2011 Note to Candidates and Tutors: The purpose of the suggested answers is to provide students and tutors with guidance as to the key points students
More informationWHAT IS A CONDITION AND PROGNOSIS REPORT AND WHAT PURPOSE DOES IT SERVE IN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS?
CONDITION AND PROGNOSIS REPORTS BACK TO BASICS WHAT IS A CONDITION AND PROGNOSIS REPORT AND WHAT PURPOSE DOES IT SERVE IN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS? The purpose of damages awarded in personal injury/clinical negligence
More informationSally Anne Hyde v- Milton Keynes Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Contents Sally Anne Hyde v- Milton Keynes Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 1 Kai Surrey (by his Mother and Litigation Friend Amy Surrey) v- Barnett & Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust 5 Nirjalmit Mehmi v- Mr
More informationWEBSITE TERMS OF USE AGREEMENT
WEBSITE TERMS OF USE AGREEMENT Welcome to http://ncoms.org (the NCOMS Website ), which is owned and operated by the North Carolina Oncology Managers Society d/b/a North Carolina Oncology Management Society.
More informationORCHIDS WESTERN AUSTRALIA INC.
ORCHIDS WESTERN AUSTRALIA INC. Contents INTERPRETATION... 4 1. THE ASSOCIATION... 6 1.1 Association Name.... 6 1.2 Objects of the Association... 6 1.3 Powers of the Association... 7 1.4 Rules... 7 2 MEMBERSHIP...
More informationThe Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act, 820 ILCS 115/1 et seq.
The Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act, 820 ILCS 115/1 et seq. Seminar Topic: This program defines the Wage Payment Act and describes, in detail, how it requires every employer to pay full and final
More informationVictoria House Bloomsbury Place 26 November 2014 London WC1A 2EB. Before: PETER FREEMAN CBE QC (HON) (Chairman) BRIAN LANDERS STEPHEN WILKS
Neutral citation [2014] CAT 19 IN THE COMPETITION Case Number: 1226/2/12/14 APPEAL TRIBUNAL Victoria House Bloomsbury Place 26 November 2014 London WC1A 2EB BETWEEN: Before: PETER FREEMAN CBE QC (HON)
More informationSRA Compensation Fund Rules 2011
SRA Compensation Fund Rules 2011 Rules dated 17 June 2011 made by the Solicitors Regulation Authority Board, subject to the coming into force of relevant provisions of an Order made under section 69 of
More informationIN THE MATTER OF NARESH TRIVEDI, solicitor - AND - IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974
No. 9294-2005 IN THE MATTER OF NARESH TRIVEDI, solicitor - AND - IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Mr J P Davies (in the chair) Mr A G Gibson Mr M G Taylor CBE Date of Hearing: 15th December 2005
More informationb) Where we work on a matter jointly for more than one client, the rights and obligations of the joint clients will be joint and several.
TERMS & CONDITIONS OF CHIOTELIS & CO I] Preface & Definitions 1. Panagiotis Chiotelis, a lawyer of the Supreme Court of Greece and a solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales is trading as Chiotelis
More informationBefore: MR. JUSTICE STADLEN Between:
Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWHC 4146 (QB) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION Case No: HQ 12 X 00390 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 21/11/2012 Before: MR. JUSTICE
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE SHAERF. Between THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT. and
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 8 September 2017 On 26 September 2017 Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE SHAERF
More informationBefore : HIS HONOUR JUDGE PLATTS Between : - and -
IN THE MANCHESTER COUNTY COURT Case No: 2YJ60324 1, Bridge Street West Manchester M60 9DJ Date: 29/11/2012 Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE PLATTS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : MRS THAZEER
More informationWeekly Update A summary of recent developments in insurance, reinsurance and litigation law
Weekly Update A summary of recent developments in insurance, reinsurance and litigation law 12/10 CONTENTS Sylvia Shipping v Progress Bulk Carriers 2 A case on the test for remoteness of damages and whether
More informationThe Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act, 820 ILCS 115/1 et seq.
The Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act, 820 ILCS 115/1 et seq. S eminar Topic: This program defines the Wage Payment Act and describes, in detail, how it requires every employer to pay full and final
More informationThe Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board. Disciplinary Procedure Rules
The Patent Regulation Board and The Trade Mark Regulation Board Disciplinary Procedure Rules The Patent Regulation Board of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and the Trade Mark Regulation Board
More informationAll applications must meet the tests for probable cause and reasonableness set out in these guidelines.
Assessing probable cause and reasonableness ASSESSING PROBABLE CAUSE AND REASONABLENESS Unless otherwise stated, "the Act" or "the 1986 Act" means the Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986, and the regulations
More informationGuide: An Introduction to Litigation
Guide: An Introduction to Litigation Matthew Purcell, Head of Dispute Resolution Saunders Law Solicitors The aim of this guide This guide is designed to provide an outline of how to resolve a commercial
More informationCOSTS SPECIAL CASES COSTS PAYABLE BY OR TO PARTICULAR PERSONS
COSTS SPECIAL CASES PART 48 PART 48 Contents of this Part I Rule 48.1 Rule 48.2 Rule 48.3 Rule 48.4 Rule 48.5 Rule 48.6 Rule 48.6A II Rule 48.7 Rule 48.8 Rule 48.9 Rule 48.10 COSTS PAYABLE BY OR TO PARTICULAR
More informationBefore: DISTRICT JUDGE BALDWIN. (sitting as a Regional Costs Judge) Between: KARLA BATES. -and- DAVID BOURNE
IN THE COUNTY COURT SITTING AT LIVERPOOL Case No: C03SW322 C03SW323 35 Vernon Street Liverpool L2 2BX Hearing Date: 21 st February 2017 Before: DISTRICT JUDGE BALDWIN (sitting as a Regional Costs Judge)
More informationSOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No and. Before:
The Tribunal s Order is subject to appeal to the High Court (Administrative Court) by the Respondent. The Order remains in force pending the High Court s decision on the appeal. SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY
More informationBefore : LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES. Practice Direction (Costs in Criminal Proceedings) 2015
Neutral Citation Number: [2015] EWCA Crim 1568 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION) Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 29/09/2015 Before : LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES
More informationPart 18 Questions in RTA Cases Where Fraud is Alleged. By Deborah Tompkinson Clerksroom August 2012
Part 18 Questions in RTA Cases Where Fraud is Alleged By Deborah Tompkinson Clerksroom August 2012 Telephone 0845 083 3000 or go to www.clerksroom.com 1 Introduction If you have got this far, then you
More informationEMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL FLEETBANK HOUSE, 2-6 SALISBURY SQUARE, LONDON EC4Y 8AE
Appeal No. UKEAT/0187/16/DA EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL FLEETBANK HOUSE, 2-6 SALISBURY SQUARE, LONDON EC4Y 8AE At the Tribunal On 13 December 2016 Before THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MITTING (SITTING ALONE)
More informationProfiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working directors
Profiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working directors Author: Tim Wardell Special Counsel Edwards Michael Lawyers Profiting from your own mistakes: Common law liability and working
More informationA response by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers December 2017
Civil Justice Council ADR and Civil Justice A response by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers December 2017 Page 1 of 10 The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) is a not-for-profit organisation
More informationAnti-suit Injunctions: Expanding Protection for Arbitration under English Law
169 Anti-suit Injunctions: Expanding Protection for Arbitration under English Law Jamie Maples and Tim Goldfarb* Introduction Where parties have agreed to resolve a particular dispute through arbitration,
More informationSOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL. IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No and. Before:
SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No. 11360-2015 BETWEEN: SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY Applicant and JEAN ETIENNE ATTALA Respondent Before: Mr D. Glass (in
More informationLegal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: Implications for Personal Injury Litigation
www.mcdermottqc.com Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill: The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill covers a wide
More informationJustice Marvin A. Zuker ONTARIO SMALL CLAIMS COURT PRACTICE
Justice Marvin A. Zuker ONTARIO SMALL CLAIMS COURT PRACTICE Practice Advisor June 28, 2013 Below please find a comprehensive collection of updates to the legislative provisions that have been amended since
More informationGUIDELINES ON COMPENSATION FUND CLAIMS PROCEDURES. Overview
GUIDELINES ON COMPENSATION FUND CLAIMS PROCEDURES Overview These Guidelines outline the general principles that will guide the Law Society of Ireland (the Society ) in the exercise of its functions regarding
More informationIN THE LIVERPOOL COUNTY COURT (APPEALS) County Court 35 Vernon Street Liverpool HIS HONOUR JUDGE PARKER
IN THE LIVERPOOL COUNTY COURT (APPEALS) A23YJ619 County Court 35 Vernon Street Liverpool 28 th April 2016 Before: HIS HONOUR JUDGE PARKER B e t w e e n: BRENDA DAWRANT Claimant/Respondent and PART AND
More informationSTANDARD CFA TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR PERSONAL INJURY CASES TREATED AS ANNEXED TO THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOLICITOR AND COUNSEL
STANDARD CFA TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR PERSONAL INJURY CASES TREATED AS ANNEXED TO THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOLICITOR AND COUNSEL FOR USE AFTER 31 JANUARY 2013 PLEASE NOTE: THESE TERMS WILL
More informationTOLATA UPDATE Issuing a claim. Claims under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996
TOLATA UPDATE 2013 Issuing a claim Claims under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 A claim is normally brought under CPR Part 8 (short claim form and detailed witness statement in
More informationAlternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) In Chapter 36 of his Final Report Jackson LJ wrote:
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) In Chapter 36 of his Final Report Jackson LJ wrote: 4.2 I recommend that: (i) There should be a serious campaign (a) to ensure that all litigation lawyers and judges
More informationLamb Chambers short form CFA for use between solicitors and counsel on or after 1 April 2013
Lamb Chambers short form CFA for use between solicitors and counsel on or after 1 April 2013 Csl s Ref: Sol s Ref: Definitions 1. In this agreement: Counsel means: and any other counsel either from Lamb
More informationThe Pre-Action Protocol for Resolution of Package Travel Claims is approved by the Master of the Rolls as Head of Civil Justice.
The Pre-Action Protocol for Resolution of Package Travel Claims is approved by the Master of the Rolls as Head of Civil Justice. The Right Honourable Sir Terence Etherton Master of the Rolls and Head of
More informationBefore : LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES
Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWCA Crim 1570 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION) Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Before : Date: 23/07/2014 LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES
More informationThe Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND 1 The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act being Chapter of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1990-91, as amended by the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1992, c.62; 1994,
More informationJW PLASTIC SURGERY. Terms of Service
JW PLASTIC SURGERY Terms of Service Welcome to www.jwplasticsurgery.com (the Site ). This Site is owned and operated by JW Plastic Surgery ( JW Plastic Surgery, we, us, and our, as applicable). We prepared
More informationPIBA S ANALYSIS OF ISSUES ARISING FROM THE JACKSON REFORMS
For the Civil Justice Council 27.2.2014 PIBA S ANALYSIS OF ISSUES ARISING FROM THE JACKSON REFORMS 1. The types of cases being taken on (and not being taken on) by law firms Some barristers are already
More informationDISTRIBUTION TERMS. In Relation To Structured Products
DISTRIBUTION TERMS In Relation To Structured Products These Terms set out the rights and obligations of Citigroup Global Markets Limited, Citigroup Centre, Canada Square, Canary Wharf, London E14 5LB,
More informationPRACTICE NOTE 1/2015
IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION TRIBUNAL PRACTICE NOTE 1/2015 (DEPORTATION - RESIDENT) (including any appeal under section 162 by a non-citizen previously recognised as a refugee or a protected person, whose
More informationGENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS
PRACTICE DIRECTION PART 44 DIRECTIONS RELATING TO PART 44 GENERAL RULES ABOUT COSTS SECTION 7 SOLICITOR S DUTY TO NOTIFY CLIENT: RULE 44.2 7.1 For the purposes of rule 44.2 client includes a party for
More informationVictoria Government Gazette G April
Victoria Government Gazette G 16 21 April 2016 803 Accident Compensation Act 1985 Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2013 MINISTERIAL DIRECTIONS Ministerial Directions with Respect to
More informationDirectors' Duties in Guernsey
Directors' Duties in Guernsey March 2018 1. OVERVIEW 1.1 This note provides a brief synopsis of the common law duties owed by directors of companies ("companies") incorporated in the Island of Guernsey
More informationElements of a Civil Claim
Elements of a Civil Claim This presentation provides an overview of the elements of a civil claim, with particular reference to construction claims, and looks at each dispute resolution option in the context
More informationBUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES CIRCUIT COMMERCIAL COURT [2018] EWHC 3021 (Comm) Royal Courts of Justice Friday, 12 October 2018
WARNING: reporting restrictions may apply to the contents transcribed in this document, particularly if the case concerned a sexual offence or involved a child. Reporting restrictions prohibit the publication
More information