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 » May » 21

GET AN INJUNCTION – PAY £27 MILLION IN DAMAGES: A POINT WORTH REMEMBERING

May 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Injunctions, Members Content

The judgment in AstraZeneca AB -v- KRKA dd Novo Mesto [2015] EWCA Civ 484 is one that should be read by anyone thinking of applying for an injunction and giving an undertaking in damages. The claimant obtained an injunction and…

PERMISSION TO CALL EXPERT WITNESS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

May 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content

I cannot recall the last time an appeal took place in relation to the question of permission to call an expert witness.  The post yesterday discussed a case where permission to call an expert was upheld.  Hot on its heels…

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...
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"
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...
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...
COST BITES 432: THE COURT CANNOT ALTER THE COSTS BUDGET UNLESS THERE ARE "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS" : HIGH COURT DECISION

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