Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Zenith Chambers, Leeds, & Hardwicke, London
Browse: Home » 2014 » April » 20

IMPORTANT CHANGES ON THE 22ND APRIL: NEW COURT FEES AND NEW STATEMENT OF TRUTH ON COST BUDGET

April 20, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Rule Changes

The previous post dealt with the date of applications and considered the potential implications if an application was not accompanied by the relevant fee. It seems timely to remind everyone that: 1. New Court Fees come into force on the 22nd…

WHEN IS AN APPLICATION "MADE"? A MATTER THAT COULD BE OF SOME IMPORTANCE

April 20, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions

The case of In Kaneria -v- Kaneria [2014] EWHC 1165 (Ch) discussed in a previous post means that there is a highly significant difference between applications made before the date of compliance and those made afterwards.   An application made after the…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2019. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
Legal Futures Civil Litigation Conference, 2019

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 15,239 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • EXAGGERATION IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WHEN THE DEFENDANT DIGS A BIG EVIDENTIAL HOLE FOR ITSELF
  • DEFENDANTS REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: INADEQUATE EXPLANATIONS WILL NOT SUFFICE
  • “IF EVER THERE WERE A CASE IN WHICH THE COURT SHOULD REFUSE TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN FAVOUR OF GIVING THE CLAIMANTS ANY FURTHER INDULGENCE, THIS IS IT”
  • WHEN LITIGATION BECOMES A “VERBAL BRAWL”: DISCLOSURE MUST BE PROPORTIONATE
  • BACK TO BASICS 31: SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM AT THE “LAST KNOWN ADDRESS”: FIVE KEY POINTS

Top Posts & Pages

  • EXAGGERATION IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WHEN THE DEFENDANT DIGS A BIG EVIDENTIAL HOLE FOR ITSELF
  • "IF EVER THERE WERE A CASE IN WHICH THE COURT SHOULD REFUSE TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN FAVOUR OF GIVING THE CLAIMANTS ANY FURTHER INDULGENCE, THIS IS IT"
  • DEFENDANTS REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: INADEQUATE EXPLANATIONS WILL NOT SUFFICE
  • TRIAL BUNDLES: TIMING, CONTENTS AND PRESENTATION : AND DO YOU KNOW SEDLEY’S LAWS?
  • WHEN LITIGATION BECOMES A "VERBAL BRAWL": DISCLOSURE MUST BE PROPORTIONATE

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death
  • Personal Injury Litigation
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 3rd edition

Useful Links

  • Hardwicke
  • Justice- Standard Order for Directions
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • www.Bailii.org
  • Zenith Chambers
  • Zenith Personal Injury Blog

Archives

Copyright © 2019 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin