Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham.
Browse: Home » Mitchell
SERVICE OF DEFENCE BY EMAIL NOT GOOD SERVICE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REQUIRED TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT (AND GRANTED)

SERVICE OF DEFENCE BY EMAIL NOT GOOD SERVICE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REQUIRED TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT (AND GRANTED)

December 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Setting aside judgment

The judgment of Mr Justice Calver in Ipsum Capital Ltd v Lyall & Ors [2020] EWHC 3508 (Comm) shows the dangers of serving documents by email. The judge held that service of a defence by email was not good service…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING FAILURES ON DISCLOSURE: THE  DEPP TRIAL IS BACK AFLOAT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING FAILURES ON DISCLOSURE: THE DEPP TRIAL IS BACK AFLOAT

July 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Disclosure, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

Last week I wrote on the latest episode of the Depp case.  Mr Justice Nicol held that there had been a failure to comply with a peremptory order on disclosure and the Mr Depp’s case stood struck out.  Today it…

THE SEVEN YEAR ITCH: CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEFS' 7th (OR 29th?) BIRTHDAY: FACTS, FIGURES AND HOW IT ALL BEGAN

THE SEVEN YEAR ITCH: CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEFS’ 7th (OR 29th?) BIRTHDAY: FACTS, FIGURES AND HOW IT ALL BEGAN

June 21, 2020 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Witness statements

This week sees the seventh anniversary of Civil Litigation Brief as a blog.  That, it appears, is relatively young as a blog, the housing law blog Nearly Legal recently celebrated its 14th anniversary and is well into its truculent teenage…

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE - A ROUND UP OF THE ROUND UPS: WHAT TO FRET ABOUT AND WHAT NOT TO FRET ABOUT...

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – A ROUND UP OF THE ROUND UPS: WHAT TO FRET ABOUT AND WHAT NOT TO FRET ABOUT…

December 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Costs, Costs budgeting, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Useful links, Witness statements, Written advocacy

There have been a series of annual reviews on key topics throughout December.  To round off the year it seemed a good idea to provide a reminder of them all and put the links in one place 2019 AND CIVIL…

APPLICATION FOR RELIEF REFUSED AFTER LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS

APPLICATION FOR RELIEF REFUSED AFTER LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS

March 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In SRI Lalithambika Foods Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 761 (Admin) Charles Bourne QC, sitting as a High Court Judge, refused the claimant’s application to rely on witness statements…

FRESH PROCEEDINGS CAN BE ISSUED IF FIRST PROCEEDINGS ON BEHALF OF THE DECEASED WERE A NULLITY: DENTON CONSIDERED

FRESH PROCEEDINGS CAN BE ISSUED IF FIRST PROCEEDINGS ON BEHALF OF THE DECEASED WERE A NULLITY: DENTON CONSIDERED

February 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Fatal Accidents, Relief from sanctions

In the judgment today in Hutson & Anor, The Personal Representatives of v Tata Steel UK Ltd [2019] EWHC 143 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered several points relating to the ability of those acting on behalf of an estate to…

5th BIRTHDAY REVIEW 4: AVOIDING PROBLEMS AFTER MITCHELL: LIVING IN THE SHADOW OF THE BIKE

5th BIRTHDAY REVIEW 4: AVOIDING PROBLEMS AFTER MITCHELL: LIVING IN THE SHADOW OF THE BIKE

June 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions

It is universally recognised that the Court of Appeal judgment in Mitchell  was a mistake.   The Master of the Rolls  stated that the decision in Mitchell decision led to a “febrile atmosphere”  leading to “unreasonable decision making”. There were 219…

THE IMPORTANCE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION

THE IMPORTANCE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION

May 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Extensions of time, Relief from sanctions

This post is caused by a search term that arrived on this blog today “Is an application for an extension of time an application for relief from sanctions?“. The short answer to that is – it depends.  An application made after…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT ISSUES IN BREACH OF CIVIL RESTRAINT ORDER

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT ISSUES IN BREACH OF CIVIL RESTRAINT ORDER

December 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

In Couper v Irwin Mitchell LLP & Ors [2017] EWHC 3231 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold refused the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions when the claimant had issued proceedings in breach of a civil restraint order. The claimant, however, was given…

DENTON PRINCIPLES LEAD TO APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS BEING STRUCK OUT: THE CONTINUANCE OF THE APPLICATION WAS DISPROPORTIONATE

DENTON PRINCIPLES LEAD TO APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS BEING STRUCK OUT: THE CONTINUANCE OF THE APPLICATION WAS DISPROPORTIONATE

December 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Relief from sanctions, Wasted Costs

The Denton principles were applied by the Administrative Court in  Haigh v Westminster Magistrates Court & Or [2017] EWHC 3197 (Admin) when striking out an application for wasted costs. “It must not be forgotten that these are satellite proceedings, adjectival to…

NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE "BEYOND" THE 11th HOUR NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED IN THE TCC

NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE “BEYOND” THE 11th HOUR NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED IN THE TCC

December 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Relief from sanctions

In DPM Property Services Ltd v Emerson Crane Hire Ltd [2017] EWHC 3092 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson overturned a decision giving a counterclaiming defendant permission to rely upon an expert report on quantum shortly before trial. The case is an example…

THE DENTON CRITERIA AND DISHONESTY: TELLING A LIE MAY NOT BE "SIGNIFICANT" BUT IT IS ALWAYS SERIOUS.

THE DENTON CRITERIA AND DISHONESTY: TELLING A LIE MAY NOT BE “SIGNIFICANT” BUT IT IS ALWAYS SERIOUS.

November 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Disclosure, Relief from sanctions

I am grateful to John McQuater for sending me through a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Robinson in the case of Wadsley -v- Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (a copy of that judgment is available here Wadsley…

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DETAILS OF CLAIM DO NOT CONSTITUTE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DETAILS OF CLAIM DO NOT CONSTITUTE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

October 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Case Management, Extensions of time, Relief from sanctions, Serving documents

In Chelsea Bridge Apartments Ltd -v- Old Street Homes Ltd (Deputy Master Cousins, 4th September 2017*) Deputy Master Cousins refused the claimants’ application for relief from sanctions in failing to serve Particulars of claim on time. “I find that the…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS  FOLLOWING BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER:  APPLICATION REFUSED:  A WORKING HOLIDAY IS NO EXCUSE

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS FOLLOWING BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER: APPLICATION REFUSED: A WORKING HOLIDAY IS NO EXCUSE

September 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions

In The Financial Conduct Authority v Da Vinci Invest Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 2220 (Ch) Mr Justice Snowden rejected a defendant’s application for relief from sanctions for breach of a peremptory order. It is unusual in that the court considered…

COSTS BUDGET ONE DAY LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DON'T MAKE MOUNTAINS OUT OF MOLEHILLS BUT PUT THINGS RIGHT - QUICKLY

COSTS BUDGET ONE DAY LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DON’T MAKE MOUNTAINS OUT OF MOLEHILLS BUT PUT THINGS RIGHT – QUICKLY

July 6, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs budgeting, Relief from sanctions

There are only two realistic options in relation to a relief from sanctions application: (i) do it properly and promptly; (ii) don’t do it all.  The dangers of a hasty application are illustrated in the judgment in Lakhani -v- Mahmud…

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS - AN ANALYSIS 3: AN ADJOURNMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED:  A BLAMELESS CLIENT IS NOT A GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS – AN ANALYSIS 3: AN ADJOURNMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED: A BLAMELESS CLIENT IS NOT A GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD

June 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Relief from sanctions

In Gladwin -v- Bogescu [2017] EWHC 1287 (QB) Mr Justice Turner overturned an order giving the claimant relief from sanctions following late service of the witness statement. In the third of the series looking at the case more closely we…

APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL TO ALLOW LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AT TRIAL: CLAIMANT'S APPEAL DISMISSED

APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL TO ALLOW LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AT TRIAL: CLAIMANT’S APPEAL DISMISSED

June 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

There are a surprising number of cases and appeals in relation to late service of witness evidence. In Byrne -v- Mullan [2017] EWHC 1387 (Ch) the claimant made an application to adduce new witness evidence which was heard on the…

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS - AN ANALYSIS 2: WHY (IN THEORY) THE DEFAULTING CLAIMANT COULD STILL RELY ON THE LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS – AN ANALYSIS 2: WHY (IN THEORY) THE DEFAULTING CLAIMANT COULD STILL RELY ON THE LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE

June 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Witness statements

In Gladwin -v- Bogescu [2017] EWHC 1287 (QB) Mr Justice Turner overturned an order giving the claimant relief from sanctions following late service of the witness statement. In the second of the series looking at the case more closely we…

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS - AN ANALYSIS 1: WHAT WENT WRONG

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS – AN ANALYSIS 1: WHAT WENT WRONG

June 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Witness statements

In Gladwin -v- Bogescu [2017] EWHC 1287 (QB) Mr Justice Turner overturned an order giving the claimant relief from sanctions following late service of the witness statement. In a series looking at the case more closely we look at what…

"THE DOG ATE MY COURTWORK": REASONS, EXCUSES AND EXPLANATIONS IN APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

“THE DOG ATE MY COURTWORK”: REASONS, EXCUSES AND EXPLANATIONS IN APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

June 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Relief from sanctions

 One thing that the the Denton decision did, without doubt*, was to put an end to the “mandatory” requirement for a “good reason” to explain a breach when applying for relief from sanctions.   However it is always incumbent upon…

1 2 … 12 Next →

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2021. 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.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

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

Join 22,748 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON’T SETTLE AFTER A MEDIATION: NO ISSUE BASED ORDER, INDEMNITY COSTS AND £127,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS
  • KERRY UNDERWOOD ON COSTS – AND SO MUCH MORE: SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE READ ALL ABOUT IT
  • SEEKING SUMMARY JUDGMENT: THERE ARE QUITE STRINGENT RULES: CLAIMANT HAD TO RECTIFY SITUATION TO OBTAIN ORDER
  • WHY CAN’T YOU ASK LEADING QUESTIONS IN COURT (AND WHY SHOULDN’T YOU DO IT WHEN PREPARING A WITNESS STATEMENT)
  • NEW FORM N244: SOMETHING TO WATCH OUT FOR

Top Posts & Pages

  • NEW FORM N244: SOMETHING TO WATCH OUT FOR
  • WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON'T SETTLE AFTER A MEDIATION: NO ISSUE BASED ORDER, INDEMNITY COSTS AND £127,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS
  • SEEKING SUMMARY JUDGMENT: THERE ARE QUITE STRINGENT RULES: CLAIMANT HAD TO RECTIFY SITUATION TO OBTAIN ORDER
  • KERRY UNDERWOOD ON COSTS - AND SO MUCH MORE: SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE READ ALL ABOUT IT
  • WHY CAN'T YOU ASK LEADING QUESTIONS IN COURT (AND WHY SHOULDN'T YOU DO IT WHEN PREPARING A WITNESS STATEMENT)

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Hardwicke
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies.
To find out more, as well as how to remove or block these, see here: Our Cookie Policy

Copyright © 2021 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin