Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2015 » January » 27

PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS: DEPARTING FROM COST BUDGETS AND FAILURE TO SERVE COST SCHEDULES: A HIGH COURT DECISION

January 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Simpson -v- MGN Limited [2015] EWHC 126 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered several contentions in relation to costs budgeting; non-service of costs schedules and proportionality. This is, again, a case that serves as an object lesson as to the…

CFA NOT FRUSTRATED BY CAPACITY: BLANKLEY APPEAL DRAWS A BLANK FOR DEFENDANT

January 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Blankley -v- Central Manchester and Manchester Children’s University Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWCA Civ 18, where judgment was given today, the Court of Appeal upheld the first instance decision that a claimant’s subsequent incapacity does not invalidate a claimant’s…

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

  • EXPERT WATCH 76 : EXPERT EVIDENCE MAY ASSIST, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT IS REASONABLY REQUIRED: PERMISSION REFUSED IN AN APPEAL WORTH TENS OF MILLIONS
  • THE DISCLOSURE OF PART 36 OFFERS: IS THE DATE OF AN OFFER PART OF ITS “TERMS”? A QUESTION THAT HAS SOME PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES: THE HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE ISSUE
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: 10 KEY POINTS ABOUT DRAFTING A DEFENCE AND THE POSTS THAT SHOW WHY THIS MATTERS
  • DECODING THE DIRECTORIES: ALSO WHO ASSESSES THOSE WHO ASSESS US: CAN LAWYERS BITE BACK? A WHOLLY FICTIONAL EXAMPLE…
  • EXPERT WATCH 75: A CASE REPLETE WITH EXPERT ISSUES: A FAILURE TO PREPARE A JOINT REPORT PLUS THE CLAIMANT CREATES DIFFICULTIES FOR ITSELF WHEN IT DOES NOT ASK ITS EXPERT TO REPORT ON POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE OUTCOMES

Top Posts

DECODING THE DIRECTORIES: ALSO WHO ASSESSES THOSE WHO ASSESS US: CAN LAWYERS BITE BACK? A WHOLLY FICTIONAL EXAMPLE...
SUPREME COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS AMENDED: REPLIES TO OBJECTIONS, BUNDLES, COURT DRESS AND DRAFT ORDERS: WHAT THIS MEANS IN PRACTICE
THE CHANCERY DIVISION IS NO MORE: A PRACTICE NOTE FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT
AI AND CIVIL JUSTICE: PREPARING FOR THE TSUNAMI – LORD BRIGGS ON ACCESS TO JUSTICE, PROCEDURAL RULES AND THE HUMAN JUDGE
MILLIONS OF DOCUMENTS, 27 FACTUAL WITNESSES AND THE ASSESSMENT OF CREDIBILITY: WITNESS EVIDENCE IN THE MANCHESTER CITY PROCEEDINGS

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