pnBlawg

the professional negligence blog

A collaboration between Rebmark Legal Solutions and 1 Chancery Lane

Judgment on TOWIE nightclub due

Judgment is due at 2pm this Monday (20 October) in a claim for assessment of business interruption and associated losses following a 2009 fire at the premises of the Sugar Hut nightclub in Brentwood, famous as the main venue of The Only Way is Essex (TOWIE).  I acted for the defendant insurance broker in the assessment of damages hearing, which took 3 days in the commercial court before ... [More]

Contesting a Will: summary judgment for the solicitor executor

On 14.8.14 Edward Murray sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division handed down judgment in King v King, King & Mark Ellis  [2014] EWHC 2827 (Ch). The widow argued that the will was invalid on two grounds: (1) lack of knowledge and approval; and (2) that it had been procured by undue influence. Mark Ellis, who prepared the will and was an executor, successfully obtained summary ... [More]

Architects’ Certificates: round 2

Time to get back into work mode after the summer slumber and look at a decision slipped out by the Court of Appeal right at the end of term on the last day of July.  A controversial decision of Akenhead J in the TCC last year has been overturned, to the relief of the defendant architects and their insurers.   The original decision had seen judgment in favour of the claimant purchasers ... [More]

Law Society: Mortgage Fraud Practice Note Update

On 31 July 2014 the Law Society issued an updated practice note on mortgage fraud. http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/advice/practice-notes/mortgage-fraud/ There are no changes to the guidance.   The changes reflect updates to the law and publications. As of October 2013 the Serious Organised Crime Agency was replaced by the National Crime Agency. The Economic Crime Command is tasked wi... [More]

Adding a new cause of action after expiry of limitation

It is well known that a court can permit a party to amend its case to plead a new cause of action even though, had it been starting such a claim in freestanding proceedings, it may have been statute-barred. CPR 17.2 provides that the court “may allow an amendment whose effect will be to add or substitute a new claim, but only if the new claim arises out of the same facts or substantially the... [More]

Warning against overly long bundles and skeleton arguments

Caldero Trading Ltd v Leibson Corporation Ltd & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 935 was a commercial law appeal. It was listed for three days. The Court was presented with no less than 17 lever arch files of documents and authorities. The appellant’s skeleton argument (including a schedule and four appendices) was 72 pages long; the respondent’s (including also four appendices) ran to 67 pages... [More]

Mitchell II: The Revenge

  Mitchell has been ‘softened’.  On Friday, the Master of the Rolls delivered his judgment in the three cases of Denton v TH White Ltd: Decadent Vapours Limited v Bevan & Ors.: Utilise Limited v Davies and Ors.  In essence, the Court of Appeal declared that Mitchell had been “misunderstood” and emphasised that the new CPR 3.9 entailed a clear three stag... [More]

Mitchell re-visited:Court of Appeal hears three linked relief from sanctions appeals

On 16 and 17 June 2014 the Court of Appeal took the unusual decision to hear three appeals together which concerned relief from sanctions and the application of Mitchell principles. One of the appeals was from the decision in Utilise TDS Ltd v Davies [2014] EWHC 834 (Ch). Both the Law Society and Bar Council intervened arguing that the approach of the Court of Appeal in Mitchell had ‘sp... [More]

Section 61 relief: is Santander v RA Legal [2014] EWCA Civ 183 the high-water mark for claimants?

In Santander UK Plc v RA Legal Solicitors (A Firm) [2014] EWCA Civ 183 (24.2.14) V agreed to purchase a house in London E16 for £200,000     and obtained an advance from Abbey of £150,000. He instructed RA. The seller instructed Sovereign Law LLP. The completion monies were transferred to Sovereign Law and the transaction apparently completed. In fact it did not complete.... [More]