Disputes & Claims.

Mediation is not, in most cases, a strict legal requirement before issuing a claim — but the courts expect parties to attempt to resolve disputes without litigation, and the pressure to do so has increased significantly. Following the Court of Appeal's decision in Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil (2023), the courts have confirmed they can lawfully order parties to engage in mediation or another form of dispute resolution, and changes to the Civil Procedure Rules (in force from October 2024) expressly give them that power. For most defended small claims (£10,000 or less), cases are now automatically referred to a free mediation service. Unreasonable refusal to mediate can lead to costs penalties even for the party that wins at trial. Our civil litigation service explains the wider costs consequences of refusing to engage in dispute resolution.

Damages for breach of contract aim to put the innocent party in the position they would have been in had the contract been performed — expectation damages. They cover: direct losses flowing naturally from the breach; and consequential losses that were within the reasonable contemplation of both parties at the time of contracting as likely to result from the breach — the rule in Hadley v Baxendale [1854]. Losses must be proved with reasonable certainty — speculative or unquantifiable losses are generally not recoverable. The innocent party must also mitigate their loss — take reasonable steps to reduce the damage caused by the breach. Damages are assessed at the date of breach in most cases. Evidence of actual financial loss — invoices, contracts, financial records — is essential to support a damages claim.

Boundary and neighbour disputes vary enormously in their complexity and cost. A straightforward dispute resolved by negotiation or mediation can conclude in weeks or months. A contested boundary dispute proceeding to a full trial in the County Court or the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) can take two to three years and cost tens of thousands of pounds in legal and expert fees — often significantly more than the value of the land in dispute. This is one of the most important facts about boundary litigation: the cost of fighting frequently exceeds the value of winning. We charge by the hour and provide a written cost estimate at the outset. A frank assessment of the costs and likely outcome at the earliest stage is essential before committing to contentious proceedings.

The limitation period for professional negligence claims is six years from the date of the breach of duty, or three years from the date of knowledge — whichever is later — under the Limitation Act 1980. The date of knowledge is when you first knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that you had suffered a significant injury or loss attributable to the professional's act or omission. In some cases — particularly where the negligence was concealed — a longer period may apply. Identifying the date from which time runs can be complex in professional negligence cases: loss may not be apparent until years after the negligent advice was given. Taking legal advice as soon as you suspect negligence is strongly recommended — do not assume there is plenty of time.

Civil litigation can be expensive, and costs recovery is never guaranteed. We charge by the hour and provide a written cost estimate at the outset. In the fast track and multi-track, the general rule is that the loser pays the winner's costs — but the amount recovered is subject to assessment by the court and is rarely 100% of the actual costs incurred. In the small claims track, costs recovery is very limited — usually confined to the court fee and fixed costs. Costs budgeting applies in most multi-track cases: parties must file and exchange costs budgets, which the court approves and which cap recoverable costs. Litigation funding and after-the-event insurance are available in some cases to manage costs risk. An honest assessment of likely costs against likely recovery is essential before committing to proceedings.

Landlord and tenant disputes arise across a wide range of issues: possession proceedings where a tenant will not leave; rent arrears; disrepair and the landlord's failure to carry out repairs; deposit deductions disputed by the tenant; unlawful eviction or harassment; disputes about rent increases; damage to the property beyond fair wear and tear; breaches of tenancy terms by either party; and service charge disputes in leasehold properties. The legal framework differs significantly depending on whether the tenancy is residential or commercial, and between England and Wales — both jurisdictions have recently introduced major reforms to residential tenancy law. Taking legal advice at an early stage — before a dispute escalates — is almost always cheaper and more effective than pursuing or defending proceedings.

Partial fault does not bar a personal injury claim — it reduces the compensation payable under the principle of contributory negligence. If the court finds you were partly responsible for the accident, your compensation is reduced by the percentage of your contribution. For example, if you are found 25% contributory negligent, your award is reduced by 25%. Common examples include not wearing a seatbelt in a road traffic accident, or failing to wear protective equipment at work when it was provided. Contributory negligence is a matter of degree — being partially at fault does not mean you cannot recover anything. Whether and to what extent contributory negligence applies is a factual question assessed on the specific circumstances of each case.

A boundary dispute arises when neighbouring landowners disagree about the precise location of the boundary between their properties. Finding the true boundary requires examining the title deeds and plans for both properties, any conveyances or transfers that have historically divided the land, physical features on the ground, and in some cases expert evidence from a land surveyor or boundary expert. The starting point is the title register and title plan held at HM Land Registry — but these documents show a general boundary only, not a precise legal boundary. Resolving a dispute often requires comparing historical documents, examining the physical features of the land, and in some cases applying legal presumptions about where boundaries lie — such as the presumption that a boundary hedge and ditch belongs to the owner on the hedge side.