Monthly Archives: July 2016


 By Bronia Hartley Oak Cash & Carry Ltd v British Gas Trading Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 153 This case has been rumbling on since 2014 (see Nicola Phillipson’s blog post – ‘Failure to file LQ – Relief from sanctions refused’). By way of reminder, the respondent’s claim against the appellant was for an alleged debt […]

Excluding a party from Court in fraudulent claims

 By Elliot Kay Da Costa and Another v Sargaco and Another [2016] EWCA Civ 764 There is a common trend in County Courts up and down the country for witnesses to be excluded from the courtroom during the evidence of another witness and/or a party when there are allegations of fraud or collusion, commonly in […]

Are You Still Open? – Can A Part 36 Offer Extinguish An Earlier Offer?

By Colin Richmond   The judgment of Mr Andrew Hochhauser QC in the case of DB UK Bank Ltd (T/A DB Mortgages) v Jacobs Solicitors [2016] EWHC 1614 (Ch) provides an important lesson regarding the distinction between Part 36 offers and those that are not made by way of Part 36 when it comes to […]

RTA CLAIMS: Caution when seeking a finding of fraud

By Maxine Best A consideration of the Court of Appeal’s recent decision in (1) Rizan (2) Rilshad v (1) Hayes (2) Allianz Insurance PLC [2016] EWCA CIV 481 before Tomlinson LJ, Rafferty LJ and Briggs LJ.   This is not an unusual set of facts in a road traffic collision. The First Claimant (driver) and […]

Has The Claimant Beaten Its Part 36 Offer? Perhaps Not As Simple As It Looks.

 By Colin Richmond Purrunsing v A’Court & Co (A Firm) [2016] EWHC 1528 (Ch) HHJ Pelling QC considered whether, when considering if a claimant had beaten its Part 36 offer, the court should simply compare the amount of the judgment with the offer the claimant had made or if account should be taken of the […]

A reminder to all about the importance and extent of pleadings

 By Joanna Hastie The Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs [2016] EWCA Civ 376 This was an appeal hearing in a very long running taxation case subject to a Group Litigation Order. The Claim and Defence in the case had both been pleaded in very general terms. Lewison LJ noted that the […]