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 » February » 24

MORE ON BUNDLES: THERE IS MUCH TIME & MONEY TO BE SAVED YET

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Written advocacy

I have often commented (and been surprised) by the fact that a post on preparing trial bundles is always the most popular page on this blog.  Following a prompt from Dominic Regan it was interesting to watch the live feed…

INADEQUATE WITNESS STATEMENTS LEAD TO CASE BEING STRUCK OUT AT TRIAL

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Damages, Disclosure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

We have looked at the case of  Devon & Cornwall Autistic Community Trust -v- Cornwall Council before.  In the first report Mr Justice Green refused an application to adjourn a trial date but gave permission to serve witness evidence late….

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT NOT RECOVERING ALL OF ITS COSTS (AND OF THE ADVANTAGES OF A PART 36 OFFER)

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In Altus Group (UK) Limited -v- Baker Tilly [2015] EWHC 411 (Ch) HH Judge Keyser QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) made various orders in relation to the Defendant’s costs.  The Defendant did not recover all their costs of…

UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL AGAINST GRANT OF RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: HOME GROUP LIMITED -v- MATREJEK

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Written advocacy

There may be a few appeals pending where a party is arguing that relief from sanctions should be granted on the grounds of the Denton criteria which “modified” the Mitchell test.  The unusual aspect of the decision in Home Group…

DECIDING CASES ON PAPER: WOODLANDS, EVIDENCE & DECIDING CASES "ONLINE"

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The decision in Woodland -v- Maxwell looked at in an earlier blog is interesting because it is one of the rare cases where the Court of Appeal carried out a (brief) analysis of the evidence in the case more than…

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

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE…
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU “OWN” IT…
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS’ SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS IN CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: WEBINAR 19th MAY 2026: USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRES AND CHECKLISTS INCLUDED
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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