26/07/2022
In Daniel Khan v Taylor Haldane Barlex Solicitors, the Claimant brought a claim in professional negligence against his former representatives alleging that they had failed to properly advise him as to the terms of a restraining order precluding contact with his children after he received a criminal conviction. This was disputed, and the Claimant failed to provide any evidence of subsequent court orders which might have clarified his position.
He was warned that his failure rendered his claim susceptible to an application for strike out and/or summary judgment but he took no steps either to provide evidence in support of his contentions or to answer the questions posed by the defendant firm. As a result, the defendant firm applied to strike out —successfully, and with an award of costs on the indemnity basis.
The Judge found that his conduct, in repeatedly failing to provide answers to questions so departing from the normal course of litigation that it was reasonable to assess costs without regard to the claimant’s representations.
Francesca O’Neill represented the successful applicant, instructed by Sarah Irwin of Weightmans LLP.
Thank you to all those who attended our Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence conference at Glaziers Hall on the 15th of April. We were pleased to bring a variety of experts together to explore the topic: Women in Focus: A spotlight on issues in injury litigation involving women A huge…
On Monday 13 April 2026 Sir Adrian Fulford, Chair of the Southport Inquiry, published his Phase 1 report. Phase 1 of the Inquiry investigated the circumstances of the attack at a Taylor Swift themed dance class in which three young children lost their lives and others suffered life…
This week Megan Bithel-Vaughan issues us with another warning on the use of AI in courts – despite our best efforts, litigators are still being caught out. You can’t say we didn’t warn you! Meanwhile Bethany Hutchison considers whether missing out a line of an…
Deka Chambers: 5 Norwich Street, London EC4A 1DR