Manjit Gill v Heer Manak Solicitors [2018] EWHC 2881 Background Mr Manjit Gill, (hereafter referred to as the Appellant for simplicity) was involved in litigation pursued by HMRC. There were six Defendants to HMRC’s claim, the first three Defendants had unpaid tax liabilities, the Appellant was the sixth Defendant who had no allegations of…
Page v RGC Restaurants Ltd [2018] EWHC 2688 (QB) This case involved a claim for personal injury after the Claimant suffered an allergic reaction from eating cashew nuts at the Defendant’s café, despite previously warning them of his allergy. Proceedings were issued in the substantive matter and a CCMC was listed with the parties to file…
LINK UP MITAKA LIMITED trading as THEBIGWORD -v- LANGUAGE EMPIRE LIMITED & YASAR ZAMAN The Rules Section IV of CPR 45 provides for scale costs for claims in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court. The practice direction sets out the maximum amount that can be awarded at each stage in the proceedings. However, CPR 45.30…
In the recent case of Reynolds v One Stop Stores Limited (unreported), an appeal in the County Court at Norwich and Cambridge, the Court gave further guidance of the approach to take to the issue of proportionality. The claim for costs arose from an employer liability claim following an injury to the Claimant’s wrist in…
In the recent case of Mr Douglas Hague v British Telecommunications Plc attention has been drawn to the importance of attendance notes in supporting agreements between the parties when a point is contested. The circumstances of this claim pertain to the Claimant, Mr Douglas Hague, who was diagnosed with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Settlement was achieved…
It is not uncommon in multi Defendant cases for a Claimant to need to discontinue against one or more Defendants. However, in the case of BAE Systems Pension Funds Trustees Ltd v Bowmer & Kirkland Ltd [2018] EWHC 1222 (TCC) Mrs Justice Jefford highlighted the issues faced by Claimants and refused the Claimant’s Application for an…
Phoenix Healthcare Distribution v Woodward and another [2018] EWHC 2152 (Ch) was an appeal in a contract and misrepresentation claim brought by Sally Woodward and Mark Addison against Phoenix Healthcare Distribution. Mills & Reeve were the Solicitors instructed to act on behalf of the Defendants and on 17 October 2017 the Claimant, via its Solicitors Collyer…
Holmes v West London Mental Health Trust In this exceptionally serious case of mismanagement of a Claimant resulting in Lithium poisoning, the Judge examined the Part 36 rules when considering the appropriate order to make on costs liability resulting in an award of indemnity costs for the Claimant. The case is indeed some welcome news…
Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654 The above case was originally heard by Regional Costs Judge Hale and was then leapfrogged to the Court of Appeal. The upshot is that “successful” Defendants can take advantage of the sums paid to the Claimant by an “unsuccessful” Defendant, but not when the matter settles…
To what extent and when should Counsel’s brief fee be recoverable where a matter settles shortly before a hearing? The issue was recently considered in a challenge to a detailed assessment in Hugh Cartwright & Amin v Devoy-Williams and another [2018] EWHC 1692 (QB) (4 July 2018) (Davies J). The case involved a dispute over an…