Copyright
© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2022.
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
Recent Posts
- COST BITES 37: DRAFTING THE SCHEDULE FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT: DEFECTS, DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES
- APPLICATIONS TO AMEND PLEADINGS SHOULD NORMALLY BE SUPPORTED BY A DRAFT AND WITNESS EVIDENCE AS TO THE MERITS: A RIGHT ROYAL ISSUE
- CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE ON DEPUTYSHIP AND COURT OF PROTECTION COSTS: SUCCESSFUL APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT
- PROVING THINGS 243: ITS WITNESSES THAT COUNT IN FINDING PRIMARY FACTS, NOT EXPERTS
- PART 36: CONDUCT & REDUCTION OF CLAIMANT’S COSTS: A SETTLEMENT STRATEGY THAT WAS “COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC”
Top Posts & Pages
- APPLICATIONS TO AMEND PLEADINGS SHOULD NORMALLY BE SUPPORTED BY A DRAFT AND WITNESS EVIDENCE AS TO THE MERITS: A RIGHT ROYAL ISSUE
- CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE ON DEPUTYSHIP AND COURT OF PROTECTION COSTS: SUCCESSFUL APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT
- COST BITES 37: DRAFTING THE SCHEDULE FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT: DEFECTS, DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES
- PROVING THINGS 243: ITS WITNESSES THAT COUNT IN FINDING PRIMARY FACTS, NOT EXPERTS
- PART 36: CONDUCT & REDUCTION OF CLAIMANT'S COSTS: A SETTLEMENT STRATEGY THAT WAS "COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC"
Blogroll
Books
Useful Links
Archives
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy