Call us today0800 160 1298
 
 

Advantage Litigation

Welcome to Advantage Litigation Services. We provide affordable access to commercial litigation.

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

Is UK litigation becoming more antagonistic?

Posted by on in Uncategorized
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 433
  • Subscribe to this entry
  • Print

Whilst Covid-19 may have forced many parts of society to slow down and re-think our approach to all aspects of our lives, recent comments by a number of High Court judges would seem to indicate that this is certainly not happening in civil and commercial litigation. The 3 judges have expressed their disquiet over the ever increasing pervasiveness of hostile and antagonistic approaches to litigation where every point, good or bad, is taken.

In the case of Navigator Equities Ltd & Ors v Deripaska from July this year, Mr Justice Andrew Baker said that, in the 30 years in which he had worked in commercial dispute resolution:

There has been a significant general increase in hostility and aggressiveness in the conduct of disputes…the taking of any and every point, good or bad, and other failures to display proper independence from the litigating client is treated too often as if it were a normal or appropriate adjunct of well-funded, hard fought, business disputes, particularly if there are issues of dishonesty involved.”

Justice Baker’s comments were also cited recently by Master Davidson for having a “certain resonance” in Vale SA v BSG Resources Ltd & Anor. In this case, the hearing was an application to set aside an order that Dag Lars Cramer, the director of a company which was a judgment debtor, should attend court to provide information that would enable the judgment creditor to enforce the debt. Commenting on the case, Master Davidson said that spending £254,000 on the application was “inappropriate and disproportionate both in amount and object” and added:

The points taken on Mr Cramer’s behalf were not a mixture of good and bad; they were all bad. Further, the language of the correspondence and submissions was inappropriate to Mr Cramer’s situation…he is an officer of a company which owes the claimant a sum in excess of US$2 billion, none of which has been paid. He has been made the subject of a routine procedure which the claimant was entitled to follow and to which he could not reasonably object…Some recognition of that would have been preferable to the tones of outrage and indignation which were employed.”

Master Davidson added:

Whilst in form offering cooperation, the substance and reality of Mr Cramer’s approach has been quite the opposite. Where the precise responsibility for these matters lies is not something that I can or need determine…All I will say is that parties to litigation and their professional advisers are not bound to take bad or hopeless points; they are not bound to adopt a needlessly antagonistic stance to their opponents, and both things are likely in the end to operate directly contrary to their interests.” 

In a third case, published last week but from a ruling from April this year, Chief Master Marsh highlighted elements of the Astra Asset Management UK Ltd & Anor v MUSST Investments LLB & Ors. In discussing disclosure applications, he said:

They are an example of parties to business litigation… pursuing their respective claims and defending those brought against them with great vigour and at great cost…Up to a point it is open to parties to conduct litigation in that way, but it is not trite in the context of this claim to remind the parties that the court is required to manage the litigation in accordance with the overriding objective and that, as a consequence, the court must have regard to the need to manage litigation justly and at proportionate cost.”

Commercial Litigation Funding

If you are thinking about taking legal action against another individual or company but are worried about the costs involved, Advantage Litigation Services have the skills and expertise to help you find a way of funding commercial litigation without risking your personal finances or those of your business. Click here to contact us today or call 0800 160 1298 to see how we can help.

Get in touch

  1. Your Name(*)
    Please let us know your name.
  2. Your Email(*)
    Please let us know your email address.
  3. Company Name(*)
    Please write a subject for your message.
  4. Your Phone Number
    Invalid Input
  5. Message(*)
    Please let us know your message.
  6. Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Invalid Input

Latest News

  • Following recent Supreme Court rulings in two professional negligence cases, the Court has outlined a “wholly new legal roadmap” for professional negligence claims made in England and Wales. As a result, the Professional Negligence Lawyers Association (PNLA) have said that existing claims will now need to be reviewed, stating that “for many there could be a substantial impact on the likely chances of success and the assessment of financial loss”.The cases in question are Khan v Meadows [2021] and Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP [2021]. The first case centred on whether a medical expert, who failed to diagnose that a mother carried the haemophilia gene, was liable for the costs associated with her son’s autism as well as his haemophilia, whilst the second case concerned whether accountants Grant Thornton were liable for the costs of a building society... Read More

  • A recently failed business claim that was dismissed at court has once again highlighted the many pitfalls and legal complexities facing litigants in person (LIPs – that is, individuals taking legal action without professional representation from a solicitor or barrister). The claim in question - Daly & Anr v Ryan & Anr. 2021 - concerned an individual businessman who had a costly judgment entered against him simply because he had repeatedly failed to abide by the rules. Read More

  • Latest statistics from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), who are responsible for the regulation of solicitors and law firms in England and Wales, confirm what many in the profession have been predicting for a while; that law firms are accelerating the consolidation process as they begin to embrace new ways of working. Read More