Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2014 » October » 20

CHALLENGING THE AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS: THE IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING THE RULES & A FEW POINTS FROM THE CASES

October 20, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case, Written advocacy

The earlier post on Redstone Mortgages Ltd -v- B Legal Ltd[2014]EWHC 3390 (Ch)contained some important observations from the judge on the steps to be taken if a party wishes to challenge the authenticity of a document. Here we look at this…

COSTS ASSESSED AT NIL WHEN SOLICITOR FAILED TO MAKE PROPER INVESTIGATIONS INTO CLIENT'S FUNDING

October 20, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

The case of McDaniel & Co -v- Clark (QBD Hickinbottom J 15/10/14) contains a clear warning that solicitors must make proper enquiries about funding at a very early stage. (This post is based on the Lawtel note of the judgment…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CAN DELAY IN APPLYING TO STRIKE OUT AN ACTION FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS BE AN ABUSE OF PROCESS IN ITSELF? THE DANGERS OF LETTING TIME GO BY?
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES: AN OVERVIEW AND THE RELEVANT GUIDANCE CONSIDERED (AUGUST 2020)
  • AN ORDER FOR WASTED COSTS NARROWLY AVERTED – BUT THERE WERE ISSUES ON BOTH SIDES: “NONE OF THE LEGAL PROFESSIONALS IN THIS CASE HAVE AVERTED THEMSELVES WITH GLORY”
  • ATTEMPTS TO “REVISIT” THE PRELIMINARY ISSUES REFUSED: ALSO THE JUDGE WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TO SEE WITNESS STATEMENTS NOT JUST DOCUMENTS…
  • ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW A RECAP OF THE SERIES 3: “THERE IS A SPECIAL RING IN HELL FOR A CERTAIN TYPE OF ADVOCATE”: WHY ALL LITIGATORS SHOULD KNOW THESE THINGS…

Top Posts

CLAIMANT'S SUCCESSFUL APPEAL AGAINST THE STRIKING OUT OF A CASE BECAUSE A WITNESS STATEMENT HAD NOT BEEN PROVIDED: THE SMALL CLAIMS PROTOCOL IS (VERY) DIFFERENT...
AN ORDER FOR WASTED COSTS NARROWLY AVERTED - BUT THERE WERE ISSUES ON BOTH SIDES: "NONE OF THE LEGAL PROFESSIONALS IN THIS CASE HAVE AVERTED THEMSELVES WITH GLORY"
FAILING TO GIVE THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: THE JUDGE MAY THINK THAT THERE IS SOMETHING FISHY GOING ON HERE...
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW A RECAP OF THE SERIES 3: "THERE IS A SPECIAL RING IN HELL FOR A CERTAIN TYPE OF ADVOCATE": WHY ALL LITIGATORS SHOULD KNOW THESE THINGS...
COST BITES 432: THE COURT CANNOT ALTER THE COSTS BUDGET UNLESS THERE ARE "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS" : HIGH COURT DECISION

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
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
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop