Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham.
Browse: Home » 2015 » December » 11

"TOTALLY HOPELESS" APPLICATION FOR DISCLOSURE;INADEQUATE WITNESS STATEMENTS;APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION REFUSED:ALL LEGAL LIFE IS HERE

December 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Serving documents, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in London Borough of Bromley -v- Heckel [2015] EWHC encompasses many of the themes regularly discussed in this blog. Proceedings were issued late;there was an inappropriate application for disclosure;the witness evidence was inadequate. Finally…

NO SPECIAL RULES FOR LITIGANTS IN PERSON: COSTS DO NOT FOLLOW THE EVENT FOLLOWING UNREASONABLE CONDUCT

December 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Litigants in person, Uncategorized

Master Mathews faced an unusual scenario in Jones -v- Longley [2015] EWHC 3362 (Ch).  This case highlights the fact that litigants in person are not subject to any special rules and are liable to have orders for costs made against…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2021. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 23,033 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CLEAR FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NO SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE IN APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE: CLAIMANT IN AT THE DEEP END
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 6th APRIL 2021: THE DECLARATION THAT THE SOLICITOR HAS TO SIGN
  • AVOIDING PROBLEMS: TWELVE THINGS FOR LITIGATORS TO THINK ABOUT IN MARCH
  • GOING BANKRUPT DID NOT RELEASE BANKRUPT FROM A JUDGMENT DEBT: JUDGE GIVES PERMISSION FOR ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS TO CONTINUE DESPITE A SUBSTANTIAL DELAY
  • PROVING THINGS 205: COUNSEL NOT ENTITLED TO £6,922,532 IN FEES BUT WERE ENTITLED TO EXEMPLARY DAMAGES

Top Posts & Pages

  • AVOIDING PROBLEMS: TWELVE THINGS FOR LITIGATORS TO THINK ABOUT IN MARCH
  • CLEAR FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NO SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE IN APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE: CLAIMANT IN AT THE DEEP END
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 6th APRIL 2021: THE DECLARATION THAT THE SOLICITOR HAS TO SIGN
  • PROVING THINGS 205: COUNSEL NOT ENTITLED TO £6,922,532 IN FEES BUT WERE ENTITLED TO EXEMPLARY DAMAGES
  • GOING BANKRUPT DID NOT RELEASE BANKRUPT FROM A JUDGMENT DEBT: JUDGE GIVES PERMISSION FOR ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS TO CONTINUE DESPITE A SUBSTANTIAL DELAY

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Hardwicke
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

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

Copyright © 2021 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin