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 » November » 04

"IN TIME" APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM REFUSED: A DANGER AREA TO WATCH

November 4, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Frontier Estates -v- Berwin Leighton Paisner (Ch D 30/10/2014)* John Male QC upheld a decision not to grant an extension of time for service of the particular of claim. What makes this case important is that the application was…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS CAN BE HEARD WITHOUT A FORMAL APPLICATION: CUTLER -V- BARNET

November 4, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Cutler -v- Barnet (QBD 31/10/14)* Supperstone J held that an application for relief from sanctions could be heard even if it were not made formally in writing. THE CASE The defendant was resisting a claim for possession. She had…

CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF 20 YEARS AGO: WHAT WAS IN THE NEWS AND WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM IT?

November 4, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content

Whilst blogs have not been around 20 years* Civil Litigation Brief has. Twenty years ago it was a monthly column in the Solicitors Journal (monthly now seems a leisurely timetable). It is interesting to see what was making the news…

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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: 10 KEY POINTS THAT LITIGATORS SHOULD KNOW: A JUDGE MAKE GET A BIT IRKED IF YOU TRY TO USURP THEIR ROLE (OCTOBER 2018)
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE HALLUCINATIONS – CAUSING PROBLEMS FOR THE PROFESSION AGAIN: “… THIS DECISION ILLUSTRATES THE CONSIDERABLE PROCEDURAL DIFFICULTIES WHICH CAN ARISE WHEN INAPPROPRIATE USE IS MADE OF AI”
  • PROVING THINGS 298: CLAIMANT BANK FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE EVEN THOUGH ONE DEFENDANT WAS DEBARRED FROM DEFENDING: VERIFIED PLEADINGS AND DOCUMENTARY COMMENTARY WERE NO SUBSTITUTE FOR PROOF
  • WHAT HAS CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF DONE ABOUT … OPPOSING APPLICATIONS TO AMEND STATEMENTS OF CASE? TEN KEY POINTS AND A BONUS POINT ABOUT LISTS OF ISSUES
  • STRIKING OUT AND ABUSE OF PROCESS: WHEN EARLIER ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS DO NOT PREVENT A SUBSEQUENT CLAIM: AND YOU CANNOT SIMPLY BYPASS CPR PART 24

Top Posts

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