“Off-Plan” Investment Schemes: Equitable Compensation – Hardwicke Chambers

‘The SRA has issued warning notices[1] to solicitors regarding whether they should act and how they should act towards their clients in relation to purported transactions concerning investment schemes. However, for many the warning will have come too late since many investors have previously parted with deposits (in some cases amounting to the client’s life savings) in return for worthless insurance bonds and unsecured interests in land or property which are also found to be worthless when the developer defaults on the development and becomes insolvent.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 12th July 2018

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Part 36: no presumption in favour of indemnity costs on late acceptance – Hailsham Chambers

Posted August 7th, 2018 in costs, delay, indemnities, news, part 36 offers, time limits by sally

‘Where a defendant accepts a claimant’s Part 36 offer after expiry of the 21 day period, many claimants (and legal commentators) have argued that the claimant should be entitled to recover indemnity costs from the expiry of the relevant period, just as they would if the case had gone to trial and the same result had been achieved. This argument has been particularly attractive to claimants where fixed costs apply, as an order for indemnity costs will allow the claimant to recover more than fixed costs. A number of County Court Judges and District Judges have accepted this argument in PI actions to which fixed costs apply.’

Full Story

Hailsham Chambers, 23rd July 2018

Source: zm4b8103lu53ydv9q1e2go51-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com

Costs blow for tardy defendant with ‘worse than hopeless’ case – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted August 6th, 2018 in costs, delay, hospitals, indemnities, negligence, news, part 36 offers, time limits by sally

‘Civil claimants despairing at Part 36 costs rules have a ray of hope following a court’s decision to swing the pendulum their way again. In Holmes v West London Mental Health NHS Trust the High Court ruled last week that a defendant party who waited 15 months to accept a Part 36 offer must pay indemnity costs covering the period of delay.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 3rd August 2018

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Indemnity costs, allegations of fraud and discontinuance: PJSC Aeroflot v Forus and others [2018] EWHC 1735 (Ch) – Zenith PI

Posted July 20th, 2018 in costs, fraud, indemnities, news by tracey

‘There are lessons for practitioners in all areas in the judgment of Rose J in Aeroflot v Forus and others. That case – a long-running chancery matter concerning skulduggery, political intrigue and alleged fraud –stands as a reminder that parties plead fraud at their peril.’

Full Story

Zenith PI, 17th July 2018

Source: zenithpi.wordpress.com

High Court orders indemnity costs against claimant that discontinued on eve of hearing – Litigation Futures

Posted July 10th, 2018 in airlines, costs, fraud, indemnities, news by sally

‘Russian state airline Aeroflot has been ordered to pay indemnity costs for the entire eight years of a fraud claim that it dropped on the eve of opening submissions.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 10th July 2018

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Indemnity insurance reforms not worth the risk, cautions ABI – Legal Futures

Posted June 25th, 2018 in indemnities, insurance, news, solicitors by sally

‘The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is wrong to assume that premiums will fall as a result of its professional indemnity insurance (PII) reforms, the Association of British Insurers (ABI) has warned.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 25th June 2018

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Court of Appeal overturns ruling based on bad advice from counsel – Litigation Futures

Posted June 13th, 2018 in appeals, costs, indemnities, news, part 36 offers by sally

‘The Court of Appeal has overturned the decision of a High Court judge who was wrongly told by counsel that indemnity costs were the default order when a claimant failed to beat a part 36 offer.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 12th June 2018

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Indemnity insurance reforms “will damage small firms” – Legal Futures

Posted April 4th, 2018 in indemnities, insurance, law firms, news by sally

‘Indemnity insurance reforms put forward by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) last month will damage the small firms the regulator is trying to help, a specialist law firm has warned.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 4th April 2018

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Nesbit Law Group LLP v Acasta European Insurance Company Limited [2018] EWCA Civ 268 – 4 New Square

Posted March 16th, 2018 in exclusion clauses, indemnities, insurance, news by sally

‘In Nesbit Law Group LLP the Court of Appeal had to determine the proper construction of an exclusion clause in a series of Fidelity Guarantee Indemnity policies and whether the insurer should be permitted to amend its defence (the application having been made weeks before the hearing of the appeal) to allege various breaches of a loan agreement by insured which breaches were necessary for the insured to be caught by the exclusion clause.’

Full Story

4 New Square, 23rd February 2018

Source: www.insurancelaw.london

Provisional assessment cap not displaced by part 36 offer, Court of Appeal rules – Litigation Futures

Posted December 20th, 2017 in costs, indemnities, news, part 36 offers by sally

‘An award of indemnity costs after a successful part 36 offer in a provisional assessment does not remove the £1,500 costs cap, the Court of Appeal has ruled in overturning the High Court.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 20th December 2017

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Court of Appeal: ATE that can be voided is not adequate replacement for security for costs – Litigation Futures

Posted November 24th, 2017 in costs, indemnities, insurance, news by tracey

‘After-the-event insurance which can be voided does not constitute adequate security for costs, the Court of Appeal has ruled. Overturning the decision of Mr Justice Snowden, Lord Justice Longmore said the case raised “important questions of principle” because the original decision showed “there may be a tendency (I put it no higher) for judges at first instance to accept that an ATE policy can stand as security for costs.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 23rd November 2017

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Tribunal refuses to force council to disclose legal advice over costs of employment case involving mayor – Local Government Lawyer

Posted October 25th, 2017 in costs, disclosure, indemnities, local government, news, privilege, tribunals by michael

‘A member of the public has failed in a bid to force Liverpool City Council to disclose the legal advice behind its decision to pay the costs incurred by elected mayor Joe Anderson in an unfair dismissal case.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 25th October 2017

Source: localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Judge warns against ‘hindsight’ to justify indemnity costs – The Guardian

Posted October 10th, 2017 in budgets, costs, indemnities, negligence, news by sally

‘The High Court has rejected the chance to approve indemnity costs against a losing party after it found the bringing of the case could be justified.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 10th October 2017

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Regional costs judge reverses position on part 36 offers in fixed-costs cases – Litigation Futures

Posted October 9th, 2017 in civil procedure rules, costs, indemnities, judges, news, part 36 offers by sally

‘A regional costs judge has concluded that he was wrong to rule in a previous case that late acceptance of a part 36 offer automatically entitled the claimant to an award of indemnity costs, and thus provided an escape route out of fixed costs.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 9th October 2017

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Appeal judges uphold indemnity costs order in “long and acrimonious” neighbour dispute – Litigation Futures

Posted August 16th, 2017 in appeals, costs, dispute resolution, indemnities, judges, news, part 36 offers, utilities by sally

‘The Court of Appeal has backed the order of indemnity costs against a retired couple involved in a battle over access to gas and electricity meters, who “had not come to court to assist the court in resolving the dispute but to assist themselves”.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 15th August 2017

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Collection of fees in receivables finance agreement must not be “arbitrary, capricious or irrational” says High Court – OUT-LAW.com

Posted August 2nd, 2017 in banking, Cayman Islands, fees, fiduciary duty, indemnities, news, receivers by tracey

‘The High Court has found that a lender must be rational when exercising its contractual discretion to charge collection fees under a receivables finance agreement. The agreement allowed for fees of up to 15%, however, the maximum chargeable for the lender to remain compliant with its duty was found, in this case, to be 4%.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 1st august 2017

Source: www.out-law.com

Insurer Justified in Refusing Indemnity for Misrepresentation – Park Square Barristers

‘Last month I discussed the Court of Appeal decision in Ashfaq v International Insurance Company of Hannover PLC [2017] EWCA Civ 357 in which the insurers were held to be entitled to avoid a commercial landlord policy on grounds of non-disclosure of pending criminal proceedings. The Courts again considered avoidance for misrepresentation and non-disclosure in this latest case heard by Judge Slater in the Queens Bench Division.’

Full Story

Park Square Barristers, 19th June 2017

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

Is an RTA Insurer Liable for an Unidentified Defendant? – Park Square Barristers

‘The Court of Appeal has held in Cameron v Hussain and Liverpool Victoria [2017] EWCA Civ 366 that a Claimant can obtain a judgment against a Defendant identified only by description of him as the driver of a vehicle on a particular date. Whilst in almost every other area of law such judgment would be worthless as unenforceable, the Road Traffic Act 1988 provisions impose a contingent liability against the insurer of the vehicle to satisfy such a judgment. At first blush this seems to dismantle the careful limitations placed on the European Communities (Rights Against Insurers) Regulations 2002 to effectively enable a Claimant to pursue the insurer of a vehicle despite the fact that the driver of the same is unknown. This article, drafted by Park Square Barristers’ insurance indemnity specialists, Richard Paige and Judy Dawson, looks at the Court of Appeal judgment and the implications for the insurance industry.’

Full Story

Park Square Barristers, 19th June 2017

Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk

Competition tribunal scolds Law Society over disclosure failure – Legal Futures

Posted June 7th, 2017 in competition, costs, disclosure, documents, indemnities, Law Society, news, tribunals by sally

‘The president of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has reproached the Law Society for a “deeply unimpressive” explanation of its failure to disclose all the documents it should have done in the Socrates case.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 7th June 2017

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Judge accepts “material change” argument in increasing security for costs – Litigation Futures

Posted May 15th, 2017 in costs, indemnities, news by sally

‘The High Court has agreed to order a claimant to pay additional security for costs, even though the ‘material change’ in circumstances behind the defendant’s application were known to the judge who made the original order.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 15th May 2017

Source: www.litigationfuture.com