Some notable cases

• We acted for the Claimants / Appellants over the course of most of their appeal proceedings in their broadly successful appeal, in Amanda Clutterbuck & Anor –v- William Cleghorn (as judicial factor to the estate of Elliott Nichol (deceased)) [2017] EWCA Civ 234, in which the Court of Appeal considered the application of the Aldi Stores guidelines for complex multi-party commercial litigation, where there was part but not full overlap between the issues in the present case and those in a previous related case brought by the same claimants / appellants against a different defendant.

• We were instructed by a client who had many years previously (2001) invested in a scheme for development of a plot of land, unfortunately under a badly drafted agreement. The client had instructed solicitors to bring proceedings against the counterparty to the agreement, the counterparty defending the claim on the basis that a compromise of the claim was allegedly reached (verbally) in a meeting between the two of them, providing for settlement of the claim on the basis that the client receive a larger beneficial interest in the land. The claim appeared, in consequence, to have stalled for over 3 years, and the solicitors had meantime obtained judgment against the client for their unpaid fees.

Having finally been able to obtain most of the papers, it became clear to us that the alleged compromise could not be one even if the trial judge accepted the defendant’s evidence, by virtue of Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 section 2 (a point which none of the solicitors or counsel instructed on the case, on either side, had spotted). An application for summary judgment was brought in Central London County Court, the client represented at the hearing by Oliver Dykes of this company, against Counsel for the defendant, at which hearing the defendant conceded that this main plank of his defence could not stand. The defendant then (for the first time ever) offered a substantial cash settlement. After matters were finally settled with the defendant, proceedings were then brought against the client’s former litigation solicitors for negligence, which were settled on terms that they waived their entire fees and their judgment against the client be set aside. The entire case, which resulted in the client’s receiving back, in the hand, his original investment plus some monies for interest for the lost years, was dealt with without recourse to counsel at any stage (the client’s budget not allowing for it).