*/
“Mild rebukes to counsel” and “gentle comments in judgments” are failing to get the message across that too many skeleton arguments remain “poor quality” and of “excessive length”, Lord Justice Jackson has warned.
Delivering the public reprimand in Inplayer Ltd & Anor v Thorogood [2014] EWCA Civ 1511, Jackson LJ said that in spite of previous judicial protests and the threat of costs penalties “so far, unfortunately, this message has failed to reach the profession...with regret, I must speak more bluntly.”
“As anyone who has drafted skeleton arguments knows, the task is not rocket science. It just requires a few minutes clear thought and planning before you start. A good skeleton argument (of which we receive many) is a real help to judges when they are pre-reading the (usually voluminous) bundles. A bad skeleton argument simply adds to the paper jungle through which judges must hack their way in an effort to identify the issues and the competing arguments.
“A good skeleton argument is a real aid to the court during and after the hearing. A bad skeleton argument may be so unhelpful that the court simply proceeds on the basis of the grounds of appeal and whatever counsel says on the day.
“The appellant’s skeleton argument in this case does not comply with the rules,” he continued. “It is 35 pages of rambling prolixity through which the reader must struggle to track down the relevant facts, issues and arguments.”
The successful appellant, represented by the Law Society Excellence Awards Solicitor Advocate of the Year 2014, Adam Tear, was entitled to costs but could not recover the costs of the skeleton argument, he ruled.
“As anyone who has drafted skeleton arguments knows, the task is not rocket science. It just requires a few minutes clear thought and planning before you start. A good skeleton argument (of which we receive many) is a real help to judges when they are pre-reading the (usually voluminous) bundles. A bad skeleton argument simply adds to the paper jungle through which judges must hack their way in an effort to identify the issues and the competing arguments.
“A good skeleton argument is a real aid to the court during and after the hearing. A bad skeleton argument may be so unhelpful that the court simply proceeds on the basis of the grounds of appeal and whatever counsel says on the day.
“The appellant’s skeleton argument in this case does not comply with the rules,” he continued. “It is 35 pages of rambling prolixity through which the reader must struggle to track down the relevant facts, issues and arguments.”
The successful appellant, represented by the Law Society Excellence Awards Solicitor Advocate of the Year 2014, Adam Tear, was entitled to costs but could not recover the costs of the skeleton argument, he ruled.
“Mild rebukes to counsel” and “gentle comments in judgments” are failing to get the message across that too many skeleton arguments remain “poor quality” and of “excessive length”, Lord Justice Jackson has warned.
Delivering the public reprimand in Inplayer Ltd & Anor v Thorogood [2014] EWCA Civ 1511, Jackson LJ said that in spite of previous judicial protests and the threat of costs penalties “so far, unfortunately, this message has failed to reach the profession...with regret, I must speak more bluntly.”
Chair of the Bar sets out a busy calendar for the rest of the year
Why Virtual Assistants Can Meet the Legal Profession’s Exacting Standards
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Examined by Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
Time is precious for barristers. Every moment spent chasing paperwork, organising diaries, or managing admin is time taken away from what matters most: preparation, advocacy and your clients. That’s where Eden Assistants step in
AlphaBiolabs has announced its latest Giving Back donation to RAY Ceredigion, a grassroots West Wales charity that provides play, learning and community opportunities for families across Ceredigion County
Despite increased awareness, why are AI hallucinations continuing to infiltrate court cases at an alarming rate? Matthew Lee investigates
The proscribing of Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act is an assault on the English language and on civil liberties, argues Paul Harris SC, founder of the Bar Human Rights Committee
Come in with your eyes open, but don’t let fear cloud the prospect. A view from practice by John Dove
Anon Academic explains why he’s leaving the world of English literature for the Bar – after all, the two are not as far apart as they may first seem...
Review by Stephen Cragg KC
.tmb-carlisting.png?sfvrsn=c60e2f3d_1){kind=logo}
