“But that is to reduce a solicitor to the role of unthinking flunkey; and this is not a role that a solicitor is ever expected to play.” High Court of Ireland Judge Max Barrett

“A little bit of law is a dangerous thing.” High Court of Ireland Judge Nolan

“The administration of justice (with reference to Article 34.1 of the Constitution) is a solemn process fundamental to any form of governance based upon respect for the rule of law.”  Court of Appeal of Ireland Judge John A. Edwards

“No litigant is entitled to expect or require that his case will be assigned to a particular judge ” Court of Appeal of Ireland Judge Allen

“A confessed liar cannot usually be accepted as being credible.” Lord Justice Denning

“Plaintiff argues that Messrs. Munder and Lustig were not untruthful during their depositions. Rather, the argument goes, they were responding narrowly to inartfully crafted questions. Plaintiff refers us to trial manuals that teach lawyers to instruct deponents to provide abbreviated responses and not to volunteer any information beyond what is specifically requested. We stand firm upon our precedent, which categorically rejects this type of gamesmanship during pretrial or trial proceedings when such tactics ultimately serve to subvert the truth. Witnesses who give sworn testimony by way of interrogatories, at depositions, pretrial hearings and trial, swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. We expect and will settle for nothing less. Lawyers who advise their clients and/or witnesses to mince words, hold back on necessary clarifications, or otherwise obstruct the truth-finding process, do so at their own, and their clients’ peril. ” Sorondo J. in a case cited in the dismissal of the claim taken by the family of Amy Bradley who went missing on March 24th 1998 by District Court of Appeal of Florida

“Appeals are telescopic in nature, focussing narrowly on particular issues as opposed to viewing the case as a whole.” Iacobucci and Major JJ

“It is easy to dispense injustice quickly and cheaply, but it is better to do justice even if it takes a little longer and costs a little more.” Lord Justice Peter Millett

“In the area of costs, so much depends upon the facts and circumstances
of each case that reference to authority does not have as much value as it has in other areas of the law” Young JA

“What really matters in most cases is the reasons given for the opinion. As a practical matter a well-constructed expert’s report containing opinion evidence sets out the opinion and the reasons for it. If the reasons stand up the opinion does, if not, not.” Jacob J.

“Truthfulness is indeed one characteristic of honesty, and untruthfulness is often a powerful indicator of dishonesty, but a dishonest person may sometimes be truthful about his dishonest opinions” Lord Hughes

“The common law fears that the champertous maintainer might be tempted, for his own personal gain, to inflame the damages, to suppress evidence, or even to suborn witnesses.” Lord Justice Denning

“For concealment to be deliberate, the defendant must have considered whether to inform the claimant of the fact and decided not to. I would go further and accept that the fact which he decides not to disclose either must be one which it was his duty to disclose, or must at least be one which he would ordinarily have disclosed in the normal course of his relationship with the claimant, but in the case of which he consciously decided to depart from what he would normally have done and to keep quiet about it” Park J.

“The notion that the unfairness of a change in the rules applying to existing applications can be taken into account when deciding if they do so apply, even if no vested right is involved is also supported by a passage, cited with approval in Wilson [2004] 1 AC 816, para 200, from the judgment of Staughton LJ in Secretary of State for Social Security v Tunnicliffe [1991] 2 All ER 712, 724. He said that it was “not simply a question of classifying an enactment as retrospective or not retrospective”, but that “it may well be a matter of degree – the greater the unfairness, the more it is to be expected that Parliament will make it clear if that is intended”. The fact that the weight to be given to the presumption varies in this way assists the conclusion that one can take into account the fairness of the result when considering whether an amendment applies to existing applications, even where no vested right is involved. ” Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury

“It would be to turn the present lifeless proceedings into a legal Frankenstein’s creation, to be jerked lumberingly into artificial animation.” Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys 

—

“The reason, of course, why courts rarely exercise the jurisdiction to measure costs is that judges do not have particular expertise in the measurement of costs.  That is the expertise of taxing masters or, since recent changes were introduced, legal costs adjudicators.  However, here again, this case is different.  The assessment which must be carried out in this case must be on the basis of the costs being NPE in light of the jurisprudence of the CJEU.  In that context, the obvious advantage which a legal costs adjudicator has over a court in the assessment of costs is not so marked or clear cut. ” Clarke C.J.

—

” What is important is that the parties should have access to such court time as enables the fair disposal of the case…… There must be some regulation of the number of experts called at trial; otherwise wealth can unfairly enhance one side of the case to the ostensible impoverishment of the other. Apart from any issue as to experts, the system of court trial requires concision in order to be fair. ” Mr. Justice Charleton Judge of the Supreme Court of Ireland

“.., who represents the Claimant, is not a lawyer and although, as I understand it, is an experienced costs draftsman it was not clear to me that he appreciated the need to address matters of evidence in witness statements.  ” Costs Judge Brown England and Wales High Court

“. . . the law of libel seems to have characteristics of such complication and subtlety that I wonder whether a jury on retiring can readily distinguish their heads from their heels.” Russell L.J.

“There will be cases in which Justice will be better served by allowing the consequences of the negligence of the lawyers to fall upon their own heads” Lord Justice Griffiths

” Experience for all of us reveals that there is no dispute, no matter how intransigent the parties are, which is incapable of being mediated. It may be there that there are many disputes which can’t be successfully mediated – or sorry, which won’t result in a successful mediation, but there are no disputes I think which simply because of the nature of the allegation prevent them from being mediated.” High Court of Ireland Judge Rory Mulcahy

“If detailed semantic and syntactical analysis of a word in a commercial contract is going to lead to a conclusion that flouts business common sense, it must be made to yield to business common sense.” Lord Diplock

“This tendency should therefore generally speaking be against literalism. What is literalism? It will depend on the context. But an example is given in The Works of William Paley (1838 ed), vol III, p 60. The moral philosophy of Paley influenced thinking on contract in the 19th century. The example is as follows: the tyrant Temures promised the garrison of Sebastia that no blood would be shed if they surrendered to him. They surrendered. He shed no blood. He buried them all alive. This is literalism. If possible it should be resisted in the interpretative process. ” Lord Justice Clarke

“It is elementary that any words in an instrument must be read and understood in the context of the instrument as a whole. Even more so, words used in a particular clause must be read and understood in the context of the whole clause.” Stewart J.

“Costs awarded are not necessarily costs recovered.” Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Master of the Rolls

“… Parliament cannot have intended to criminalise the conduct of a person using language which is, for reasons unknown to him, grossly offensive to those to whom it relates, or which may even be thought, however wrongly, to represent a polite or acceptable usage….On the other hand, a culpable state of mind will ordinarily be found where a message is couched in terms showing an intention to insult those to whom the message relates or giving rise to the inference that a risk of doing so must have been recognised by the sender. The same will be true where facts known to the sender of the message about an intended recipient render the message peculiarly offensive to that recipient, or likely to be so, whether or not the message in fact reaches the recipient”. Lord Bingham

“An honourable compromise in any case is far preferable to a futile stand on principle.” MacMenamin J. Retired Judge of the Supreme Court of Ireland

” I pause at this stage to say, and repeat, that it was quite wrong of Mr. Friedman, on any view, to have called Mr. Fogliacco, and it is absurd, if it is the case, that the penny only dropped during the call that there might be a confidentiality problem. It is in this paragraph that Mr. Friedman acknowledged that the words “Meade’s office leaks like a sieve” did not come from Mr. Fogliacco but from an impressionistic appreciation of what Mr. Fogliacco might have had to do to get to know the result. I have already said that none of that was supportable. Mr. Friedman said that he was surprised that Mr. Moss would feel compelled to draw the whole episode to the court’s attention. I do not understand his surprise. It seems to me obvious that anybody acting with integrity would expect that that had to happen.” Mr. Justice Meade

“In common with the authorities cited there must be a strong suggestion, and I will put it no further, that there were intentional failures of disclosure which may well be tantamount to deceit on the part of Mr. Hughes in relation to the transaction as a whole.” Mr. Justice John MacMenamin retired Judge of the Supreme Court of Ireland

“All courts are familiar with the litigant, often an unrepresented litigant, who will never take “no” for an answer, however unpromising his/her cause. Under the new appeals regime, however, such litigants must appreciate that the general rule will be that the decision of the appeal court on the first appeal will be the final decision. If they wish to pursue the matter further, and to incur the often quite heavy costs involved in paying the court fee and preparing the appeal papers, the Court of Appeal may dismiss their application quite shortly, saying that the appeal raises no important point of principle or practice, and that there is no other compelling reason for the court to hear the appeal…. judges of the quality of Lords Justices of Appeal were a scarce and valuable resource, and that it was important that they were used effectively and only on work which was appropriate to them (Review of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division), pp 10, 26 and 22). ” Lord Justice Brooke

“… that for a person in a position of trust, holding himself out as a responsible and honourable practitioner, to take monies in this way from the persons who had entrusted them to him attracts the gravest of disapprobation. The learned sentencing judge described the appellant’s conduct as dishonourable in the extreme, and the consequent criminality as being high. I agree with this characterisation which his Honour put upon the appellant’s conduct. For solicitors, accountants, or any persons in a position of trust, to betray that trust has traditionally been regarded by the courts as attracting grave disapprobation, accompanied by substantial sentences.”(emphasis added)  Chief Justice, Sir Laurence Street

“Non est interpretatio, sed divinatio, quae recedit a litera” Francis Bacon, Lord Chancellor of England (1618–21), lawyer, statesman, philosopher (If we depart from the letter, we are not interpreting the law, but guessing at the law.)

“One could imagine a circumstance, which is not this case, in which the wishes of two antagonistic defendants to put forward their own experts was driven by a desire to obfuscate, by putting up two witnesses with different methodologies and approaches, their purpose being to confuse what might otherwise be a clear case against them, and to throw dust in the eye of the court. In such a case the court would be perfectly entitled to direct a single joint expert irrespective of the conflict between those parties. The example also illustrates that the court or Tribunal is right and entitled to look at the matter from the point of view of the judges who will try the case, and not simply from the point of view of the parties. “ Lord Birss (who was first England and Wales Court of Appeal judge to admit having used ChatGPT-generated content in a judgement saying he found it “Jolly useful” Source: The Law Gazette, 14 September 2023. https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/solicitor-condemns-judges-for-staying-silent-on-woeful-reforms/5117228.article
Perhaps the “dust” metaphor can be traced to Sir Birss’ Cambridge University first class honours degree in metallurgy and material sciences.

---

“Injustice comes from abuse of power, judicial power included, as well as from failure to exercise it.” Lord Justice Stephenson

—

“It follows, that the court should not make the order [sic to mediate] sought if satisfied that the application is brought by a party who knows that an invitation from the court will for good reason be refused and/or where satisfied that the applicant has no real interest in the ADR proposed but is motivated to make the application knowing that the refusal will allow them proceed to trial while, so to speak, holding the sword of Damocles over their opponent until the very end of the litigation.” Ms. Justice Irvine

—

“There is always in litigation a margin of error, representing error in factfinding, which both parties must take into account. Where one party has at stake an interest of transcending value – as a criminal defendant his liberty – this margin of error is reduced as to him by the process of placing on the other party the burden … of persuading the fact finder at the conclusion of the trial of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” Justice Brennan of the United States Supreme Court

—-

“To allow recovery in these cases would be to allow recovery for what is illegal. It would put the courts in the position of saying that the same conduct is both legal, in the sense of being capable of rectification by the court, and illegal. It would, in short, introduce an inconsistency in the law. It is particularly important in this context that we bear in mind that the law must aspire to be a unified institution, the parts of which — contract, tort, the criminal law — must be in essential harmony. For the courts to punish conduct with the one hand while rewarding it with the other, would be to create an intolerable fissure in the law’s conceptually seamless web…We thus see that the concern, put at its most fundamental, is with the integrity of the legal system.”  McLachlin J.

===

” The law is, indeed, always an imperfect and inadequate human division into compartments of the divine concept of justice. It is, to say the least, unlikely that an individual would willingly submit to a given injury on being offered a sum of money which might be thought commensurate with such an injury when damages came to be assessed by a jury. Equally well, it would be poor consolation to the injured individual to be given the opportunity of inflicting the self-same injury on the person who had injured him.” Niall McCarthy (25 May 1925 – 2 October 1992) Irish Judge of the Supreme Court of Ireland from 1982 to 1992. ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niall_McCarthy_(judge)

===

“On the contrary, if one adopts that old principle that ‘actions speak louder than words’ Heslin J

===

“More significantly however, there was not a single shred of evidence to support the defendant’s hypothesis that the plaintiff or her solicitors had deliberately suppressed the second accident.  Undeterred by this, counsel for the defendant accused the plaintiff of Perjury, a very serious criminal offence, and her solicitors of fraud, an accusation that could hardly be more serious for an officer of the court and one that would leave the solicitor concerned, were it true, potentially open to the most severe sanctions up to and including the loss of his or her livelihood. “

Noonan J

===

Lord Denning ” It is a very old principle laid down by Lord Coke that a man shall not be allowed take advantage of a condition brought about by himself.”