James Arney

Year of Call: 1992

jarney@tgchambers.com


Practice Areas


James Arney

Experience

Cited since 2009 in the Legal 500 for personal injury and costs, and previously as a “Leader of the Bar” in costs work in Chambers UK, James is frequently instructed in high-value multi-track litigation for both Claimants and Defendants.

Directories

“…He has very impressive tactical nous and ability.”
Band 2 Legal 500 (personal injury) 2015

Cited as ‘Leader at the Bar’ in the field of costs
Chambers UK 2011 and 2012

Education

LLB (2:1) Bristol University

Professional Memberships

Personal Injury Bar Association
Bar Golfing Society

Public Access

Undertakes Public Access work

Hicks v Personal Representatives of Ionel Rostas (Deceased) & Motor Insurance Bureau (2017) QBD (Judge Reddihough) 17/03/2017 Lawtel 21/3/17

Acting on behalf of the Defendant insurers, James Arney successfully argued that notwithstanding delays in disclosing other surveillance footage until 2 months before a trial window, it was in the interest of justice to allow the Defendant to rely on footage disclosed 8 months previously, suggesting that the Claimant was significantly more capable than he had reported. The trial window, scheduled for just 5 weeks after the application was heard, was vacated in order to do justice in the case, and avoid potential overcompensation. The penalty for late disclosure was that only the claimant could rely on the later footage, as well as in costs.

Gilbert v Jagodic

Instructed by Irwin Mitchell, James Arney secured a £650,000 settlement on behalf of a 55 year-old care worker who sustained severe leg and ankle injuries in an RTA. The claim was originally pleaded at about £737,000, but increased to just over £900,000 following the discount rate change to -0.75%. Settlement negotiations proceeded expressly on the basis that the new discount rate be used without adjustment.

Knauer v The Ministry of Justice

A costs dispute arose following the conclusion of Knauer v The Ministry of Justice, the long-awaited case which provided the Supreme Court with an opportunity to correct Cookson v Knowles as to multipliers in fatal accident claims. Contested costs matters included the appellant’s entitlement to recover success fees at 100% notwithstanding the agreement between the parties that no trial costs would be recoverable, as well as a number of line by line issues. Instructed by Charles Lucas & Marshall, James Arney negotiated a satisfactory settlement on behalf of the appellant, consistent with the 100% uplift being recovered.

Rutter v Nichols

£800,000 settlement for a claimant who sustained multiple injuries when she, her friend and her sister were run down by a motorist.

James v Ireland [2015] EWHC 1259 (QB)

Successful costs appeal, establishing that a trial had not “commenced” for the purpose of triggering a 100% fixed uplift, despite the parties, their witnesses and advocates attending for 1.5 days on the date fixed for trial. Successive adjournment applications were found to have been merely procedural, and did not constitute a trial.

Garner v Lee

Defending a brain injury case pleaded at over £3m – settlement at just over £1.1m. This case also involved a contested cost budgeting dispute as to whether provision for representation by a silk ought to be made within the budget.

Purton v Aviva & Anr

£750,000 settlement secured shortly before trial for an ankle injury sustained by a high level chef. He had returned to work since the accident, including a role in which he was earning more than he had pre-accident. The award reflected his damaged career prospects, supported by expert employment evidence and in accordance with Ogden 7 principles.

Dau Chi Chong v Funafloat Ltd t/a College Cruisers, British Waterways Board [2013] EWCA Civ 212, 2013 WL 128677

After successfully defeating a £5m personal injury claim whilst acting alongside Andrew Prynne QC on behalf of the British Waterways Board, James Arney appeared in the Court of Appeal on related costs matters. Reversing the trial judge’s exercise of discretion, the Court of Appeal reinforced the general rule that costs should follow the event. Accordingly as between the defendants the defendant/Part 20 claimant must pay only the costs in the Part 20 claim, leaving both defendants to look directly to the (partly impecunious) claimant to meet the costs of the main action.

Raggett v The Society of Jesus Trust 1929 for Roman Catholic Purposes [2012] EWHC 3132 (QB)

14-day High Court trial on behalf of a former partner of a city solicitors firm who was sexually abused as a child at school. James’ role focussed on presenting the £4.5m quantum claim in the event that the claimant had been able to establish a causative link between the abuse and his subsequent professional failings as an adult. Ultimately that claim failed for reasons of medical causation, thereby restricting the value of the claim to more modest proportions commensurate with the injury suffered and treatment thereof. This claim is of significance in emphasising the difficulty in establishing a causative link between childhood abuse and subsequent personality traits.

When has a trial commenced pursuant to CPR 45?

20th May 2015

James Arney discusses the High Court judgment in James v Ireland which considers when a trial has commenced, so as to trigger an automatic entitlement to a 100% success fee.


View External Link

Surveillance Evidence – delayed application did not constitute an ambush

17th March 2017

Acting on behalf of the Defendant insurers, James Arney successfully argued that notwithstanding delays in disclosing other surveillance footage until 2 months before a trial window, it was in the interest of justice to allow the Defendant to rely on footage disclosed 8 months previously, suggesting that the Claimant was significantly more capable than he had reported. The trial window, scheduled for just 5 weeks after the application was heard, was vacated in order to do justice in the case, and avoid potential overcompensation.  The penalty for late disclosure was that only the claimant could rely on the later footage, as well as in costs.

Read more

Settlement based on New Discount Rate

7th March 2017

Instructed by Irwin Mitchell, James Arney secured a £650,000 settlement on behalf of a 55 year-old care worker who sustained severe leg and ankle injuries in an RTA. The claim was originally pleaded at about £737,000, but increased to just over £900,000 following the discount rate change to -0.75%. Settlement negotiations proceeded expressly on the basis that the new discount rate be used without adjustment.


Knauer v The Ministry of Justice – settlement of the costs dispute.

13th December 2016

A costs dispute arose following the conclusion of Knauer v The Ministry of Justice, the long-awaited case which provided the Supreme Court with an opportunity to correct Cookson v Knowles as to multipliers in fatal accident claims. Contested costs matters included the appellant’s entitlement to recover success fees at 100% notwithstanding the agreement between the parties that no trial costs would be recoverable, as well as a number of line by line issues. Instructed by Charles Lucas & Marshall, James Arney negotiated a satisfactory settlement on behalf of the appellant, consistent with the 100% uplift being recovered.