One Response
Comments are closed.
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 35.2K other subscribers
Recent Posts
- SERVICE POINTS 13: IS A CLAIMANT SAVED BY THE FACT THAT THE DEFENDANT DID NOT FILE AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE OR MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 11? THE COURT OF APPEAL HAVE A VIEW…
- SERVICE POINTS 12: ANOTHER CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: CPR 7.6 APPLIED AND NOT 3.9 (THE CLAIMANT COULD HAVE GOOGLED THIS)
- MAZUR MATTERS 11: WHAT IS MEANT BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” 2: WHEN SOMEBODY BREACHED THE ACT AND WAS IN CONTEMPT OF COURT BY ARRANGING FOR THE SERVICE OF PLEADINGS
- EXPERT WATCH 17: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION BY THE HIGH COURT OF WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE IS PERMITTED OR “REASONABLY REQUIRED”: COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS VERY IMPORTANT HERE
- COSTS GROUP AT KINGS CHAMBERS – LOOKING FOR NEW MEMBERS: SEE THE ADVERT HERE
Top Posts
- MAZUR MATTERS 10: THE STATUTORY DEFENCE TO THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE: WHY YOU (PROBABLY) WON'T GO TO JAIL: BUT THE POSITION GOING FORWARD MAY BE DIFFERENT...
- MAZUR RECORDING - NOW AVAILABLE
- MAZUR MATTERS 11: WHAT IS MEANT BY "THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" 2: WHEN SOMEBODY BREACHED THE ACT AND WAS IN CONTEMPT OF COURT BY ARRANGING FOR THE SERVICE OF PLEADINGS
- EXPERT WATCH 17: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION BY THE HIGH COURT OF WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE IS PERMITTED OR "REASONABLY REQUIRED": COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS VERY IMPORTANT HERE
- SERVICE POINTS 12: ANOTHER CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: CPR 7.6 APPLIED AND NOT 3.9 (THE CLAIMANT COULD HAVE GOOGLED THIS)
Archives
Blogroll
Books
Useful Links
Copyright
© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2025.
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
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
Litigators now have access to online tools to build trial bundles. The tools allow a small number of documents to be selected as core (for printing) and the remainder are available electronically.
This meets three requirements:
1. The requirement by the judge to have a small and focussed paper bundle
2. The requirement by some litigators to have a large number of documents “at the ready”.
3. The requirement to agree the documents between the parties through the disclosure process.
The advice for the modern age is to prepare large trial bundles electronically, disclose and agree content electronically and then print a small core bundle.
The advertisement connected to this comment is to use the CaseLines system to do this …