piBlawg

the personal injury and clinical negligence blog

A collaboration between Rebmark Legal Solutions and 1 Chancery Lane

“ .. Friends, Romans, personal injury lawyers ...!”

Or so Mark Antony might have said if Shakespeare had been around to reflect on the amendments to the CPR which come into effect on 6 April 2015. All the talk is of the changes to Part 36. But what of the new Part 87 which is being introduced as part of the continuing drive to replace Latin terms with simpler English language.   I confess to a fondness for Roman law having been made to st... [More]

Application of Procedural Rules and Litigants-in-Person

There can be little doubt that modern litigation involves the increased presence of people representing themselves in court. Particularly amongst some kindlier judges (in all courts) there could be said frequently to be a culture of benevolence towards such litigants-in-person when it comes to non-compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules and other procedural rules.   This can lead to si... [More]

Changes to PD 21 of the CPR from 1 October 2014

From 1 October 2014 there will be two important changes to the Practice Direction to Part 21 of the CPR which will affect the preparation and conduct of settlement approval hearings.   In cases where the approval is sought of a settlement or compromise by or on behalf of a child or protected party before proceedings have been issued, a claimant child or protected party in a personal injur... [More]

Fall in the number of Small Claims - a trend set to continue?

It was widely reported last week that the number of small claims hearings has dropped by over 50 per cent in the last five years. Figures have been reported showing there were 29,577 hearings in 2013 compared to 53,248 in 2007.   A well-known consortium of about 100 solicitors’ firms has suggested that the reason for the drop in claims is due to the process becoming more expensive ... [More]

Costs Budgets and Unallocated Part 8 Claims issued before 22 April 2014

Some further clarity as to when to file costs budgets can be gleaned from the decision of Mr Justice Hickenbottom in the case of Kershaw v Roberts & Anor  [2014] EWHC 1037 (Ch). Here it was argued on appeal from the county court that the first directions hearing in a Part 8 Claim should be treated as the “first CMC” for the purposes of CPR 3.12-14 and thus costs budgets must b... [More]

Can a Defendant be required to disclose information about its insurance position? A recent decision with a sting in the tail

Any practitioner who has had to grapple with the issue posed in the title to this article will have come to realise that there are two conflicting decisions on the point.       In Harcourt v Griffin (2007) EWHC 1500 (QB), liability was admitted in a multi-million pound personal injury claim. The claimants expressed doubts about the wealth of the Defendants and made a request unde... [More]

Failure to file costs budgets: a recent example in practice

Pursuant to CPR 3.12 and 3.13, unless the Court orders otherwise all parties (unless they are litigants in person) in a multi-track case commenced after 1st April 2013 must file and exchange costs budgets. The date for doing so will either be prescribed by the Notice of Proposed Allocation served by the Court pursuant to CPR 23(1) or, in the absence of a specific date, they must be exchanged ... [More]

CPR 3.14 - How Explicit and Draconian?

The notes in the White Book below Civil Procedure Rule 3.14 suggests the “rule is explicit and the consequences of failure to comply Draconian”. The rule itself provides that “Unless the court otherwise orders, any party which fails to file a budget despite being required to do so will be treated as having filed a budget comprising only the applicable court fees.” It ... [More]