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 » 21

HYBRID DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS: E-PETITION

November 21, 2014 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

There has been considerable controversy surrounding the decision not to implement “hybrid” Damages Based Agreements. There is now an e-petition calling for an open consultation on this issue. To view the petition click on the link above or here. Calls…

AN IMPORTANT CASE ON COSTS; "INTERESTED PARTY" COSTS; RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND SUMMARY ASSESSMENT

November 21, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Group M Uk Ltd -v- The Cabinet Office  [2014] EWHC 3863 (TCC) Mr Justice Akenhead mad some important observations as to the liability to pay the costs of “interested parties”; the late serving of costs schedules; relief from sanctions…

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

  • 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…
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THE PAUCITY OF EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY THE DEFENDANTS: AN APPLICATION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CANNOT BE DEFENDED BY “BARE ASSERTION”
  • COST BITES 433: WHAT ARE “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS” WHEN YOU WANT TO VARY A COSTS BUDGET? WHY THERE WERE NO SUCH DEVELOPMENTS HERE

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...
THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DUTY TO PUT YOUR CASE: FINDINGS MADE ON KEY POINTS THAT WERE NOT PUT TO THE WITNESS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL (AUGUST 2017)
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...
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"
COST BITES 429: A REMINDER THAT A CLAIMANT IS STILL LIABLE TO PAY COSTS EVEN IF PROCEEDINGS ARE NEVER SERVED: SOMETHING ABOUT PRE-ACTION CONDUCT TOO...

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