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 » Page 4

MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT LEADS TO REDUCTION OF COSTS BY 50%: KERINS -V- HEART OF ENGLAND NHS FOUNDATION TRUST

August 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There is a report on Lawtel today of the decision of District Judge Griffith in Kerins -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust (Birmingham, 31st July 2015). The claimant’s costs were reduced by 50% because of misconduct in the assessment…

A FAILURE TO DISCLOSE CAN BE JUST AS TELLING AS DISCLOSURE ITSELF: EVIDENCE, INFERENCES AND THE BLUE ANGEL CASE

August 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision of Mr Robin Hollington QC (Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) in Davy -v- Croxen [2015] EWHC 2372 (Ch) (“The Blue Angel case”) contains some illuminating observations about the practicalities and costs of disclosure and…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS IN THE TCC: LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

August 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in North Midland Construction plc -v- Geo Networks Ltd [2015] EWHC 2384 (TCC) provides an object lesson in the dangers of delaying service of the particulars of claim. THE CASE The claimant issued two…

LATE AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS: A RELATIVE CONCEPT: HAGUE PLANT APPLIED

August 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

When is an application to amend pleadings made late, more particularly too late? This is something we have looked at several times before.  It was considered by H.H. Judge Keyser Q.C. in Hamizay Limited -v- Robin Swailes [2015] EWHC B14(Ch)….

BANKRUPTCY AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LITIGANT: 10 KEY POINTS

August 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The post about Eatons -v- Mitchells & Butler PLC led to some interesting discussions and raises some important issues. The claimant had been made bankrupt after he was injured. His lawyers overlooked this, issued proceedings, succeeded in a trial on…

CASE MANAGEMENT, NECESSITY AND EXPERTS: BA -v- SPENCER: IS EXPERT EVIDENCE "REASONABLY REQUIRED"?

August 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Case Management, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

In his decision today in British Airways Plc -v- Spencer [2015] EWHC 2477 (Ch) Mr Justice Warren made important observations about the need for expert evidence.  The judge overturned a case management decision that expert evidence was not necessary and…

ASSESSING EXPERT EVIDENCE: GUIDANCE FROM VICTORIA

August 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

There are many cases where a judge has to determine differences between experts.  It is helpful for practitioners to know what factors are taken into account when assessing evidence . The Judicial College of Victoria puts all its guidance to…

BANKRUPTCY OF CLAIMANT DID NOT RENDER ACTION INVALID OR AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

August 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Eaton -v- Mitchells & Butler PLC (30th April 2015) (reported today on Bailli) His Honour Judge Keyser QC had to consider the effect of bankruptcy upon the validity of a claim. “It is remarkable that the case had proceeded…

"AGGRESSIVE CORRESPONDENCE" AND EFFECTIVE LITIGATION: ARE THE TWO SYNONYMOUS OR DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED?

August 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content

There is an interesting report by Chloe Smith in The Law Society Gazette “Solicitor reprimanded for email calling opponent a “plonker””.  The comments that follow that article are equally interesting with the usual mix of wry and witty observations.  The…

QOCS, STRIKING OUT AND THE LIABILITY TO PAY IN FULL: A COUNTY COURT DECISION

August 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Colm Nugent of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me a copy of the judgment in Wall -v- British Canoe Union. A decision of HH Judge Lopez in Birmingham County Court on the 30th July 2015.  The judgment…

PROPORTIONALITY, ASSESSMENT AND THE COSTS OF BUDGETING: SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE DECISION TODAY

August 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In BP -v- Cardiff & Vale University Local Health Board [2015] EWHC B13 (Costs) Master Gordon-Saker considered several issues relating to proportionality; the format of bills and the costs of costs budgeting. “Having conducted an assessment of the reasonableness of…

CHILDREN, SUCCESS FEES AND DEDUCTIONS FROM DAMAGES : AN IMPORTANT JUDGMENT

August 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content, Success Fees, Uncategorized

The question of child claimants and deductions from damages remains a live and controversial one. The judgment on this issue of the regional costs judge,District Judge Lumb in A & B -v- The Royal Mail Group  [2015] EW Misc B24(CC)(14th…

ORDERING SECURITY FOR COSTS, THIRD PARTY ACTIONS AND THE COSTS BUDGET

August 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

How important is an approved costs budget in determining the sum to be ordered by way of security for costs? This was an issue considered by Mr Justice Andrew Smith in Sarpd Oil International Ltd -v- Addax Energy [2015] EWHC…

WITNESSES WHO DID NOT DRAFT (OR UNDERSTAND) THEIR STATEMENTS, WOULD BE "EXPERTS" AND OTHER WITNESS WOES.

August 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Hot on the heels of my posing the question whether 278 years of judicial prompting on witness statements had led to any results comes the decision today of Mr Justice Andrew Smith in Michael Norcross -v- The Estate of Christos…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EVIDENCE: AFTER 278 YEARS OF JUDICIAL PROMPTING HAVE PRACTITIONERS GOT THE MESSAGE?

August 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Often (once a month or so but sometimes more frequently) this blog considers a case where the judge has been critical of the witness evidence in written form. Often because the evidence is irrelevant, argumentative and consists of submissions.  This…

NEW BILL OF COSTS CONSULTATION: A USEFUL LINK

August 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

A pilot scheme is being introduced for a new bill of costs model. Initially voluntary the scheme may become compulsory. THE DRAFT BILL AND GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS Useful guidance is available on the Hailsham Chambers website.  The draft bill and guidance…

COSTS: THE FACT YOU CAN'T PAY MAKES NO DIFFERENCE: AN IMPORTANT LESSON FOR LITIGANTS

August 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Bridge -v- Daley [2015] EWHC 2121 (Ch) Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered submissions made in relation to a losing party paying costs. THE CASE The claimant sought permission to continue a derivative…

LITIGATION AS IT SHOULD NOT BE DONE: GOTCH -v- ENELCO

August 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Gotch -v- Enelco Ltd [2015] EWHC 1802 (TCC) Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart had strong words to say about the conduct of litigation and costs. KEY POINTS This is a case where five short passages from the judgment itself gives the…

PSYCHOBABBLE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: STRONG VIEWS FROM THE FAMILY COURT

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This blog has looked many times at the perils of giving “opinion” evidence in witness statements. A particularly stark example can by found in the judgment of Ms Justice Russell in re W [2015] EWHC 2039 (Fam).  Another case that…

WRITTEN ADVOCACY: CANDOUR & CONCISION ESSENTIAL GUIDANCE FROM CANADA

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

One of the advantages of writing a blog is that you can point out useful posts and articles. Anyone involved in legal argument benefit the guidance by John L Laskin J.A. in Forget the Wind-Up and Make the Pitch Some…

EXPERT EVIDENCE IN INSURANCE CASES 2: BRIT UW LIMITED: FAILURE TO DISCLOSE UNDERMINED DEFENDANT'S CASE

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There are, coincidentally, two recent cases on the use of expert witnesses in insurance disputes.  In Brit UW Limited -v- F & B Trenchless Solutions Limited [2015] EWHC 2237 (Comm) Mrs Justice Carr DBE considered the utility of expert evidence…

EXPERT WITNESSES IN INSURANCE CASES 1: INVOLNERT MANAGEMENT

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Involnert Management Inc -v- AIS Insurance Services Limited [2015] EWHC 2225 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt considered the evidence of experts in a case between insurer and insured and, more particularly,between the insured and insurance broker. THE CASE The defendants…

PERMISSION TO APPEAL CANNOT BE OPEN-ENDED: HIGH COURT DECISION

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In  Ghura -v- Dalal [2015] EWHC 2385 Mr Justice Norris rejected the idea that time for appealing could be open-ended or ambiguous in its scope. KEY POINTS The Court does not have power to extend time for appealing “generally”. In…

ESSENTIAL READING: "FEES A CROWD WHEN JUSTICE AND POLITICS COLLIDE": A NLJ & LSLA PUBLICATION

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

There is a section on this  blog devoted to links to posts on procedure and costs. Occasionally, however, a post is so important that I feel compelled to draw attention to it. This definitely applies to the publication “Litigation Trends…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS AWARD OF INDEMNITY COSTS

August 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Arcadia Group Brands Ltd -v- Visa Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 883 the Court of Appeal, dismissed an appeal on the merits,  but nevertheless overturned the judge’s order for indemnity costs. THE CASE The claimants were bringing actions for breaches…

ALDI; "SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS" AND ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIMANTS ALLOWED TO SHOP AROUND?

August 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Knowles DEB in Otkritie Capital International Ltd -v- Threadneedle Asset Management Ltd [2015] EWHC 2329 (Comm) contains some important observations for all those involved in litigation, particularly commercial litigation.  It also provides a reminder that…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY: PROBLEM WITH DEFENDANTS' EVIDENCE

August 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The recent posts on witness credibility have given rise to much attention.  Matthew Stockwell,  junior counsel for the claimant, has pointed out that the case of Pollock -v- Cahill [2015] EWHC 2260 (QB) also involves an assessment of  witness evidence….

WITNESS CREDIBILITY AGAIN: THE HIDDEN VICTIMS OF PERSONAL INJURY FRAUD: HONEST CLAIMANTS

August 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This post should serve as a necessary balance/counterblast to the earlier post on the Sonae Industria case.  In that case some of the witnesses were found to be  honest and some patently dishonest.  It was a feature  of that case…

WITNESS EVIDENCE: CREDIBILITY;FACEBOOK;TWITTER AND THE CLAIMS GO UP IN SMOKE…

August 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This blog has looked at issues relating to witness credibility many times. It is one of the most under-examined aspects of the civil litigation process. The decision of Mr Justice Jay in Susan Saunderson & Others -v- Sonae Industria (UK)…

SETTING OFF INTEREST AGAINST AN INTERIM PAYMENT: A HIGH COURT DECISION

August 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mrs Justice Cox in Manna -v- Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 2279 (QB) is a veritable goldmine for anyone who writes about civil procedure or personal injury damages.  One of the, many, issues…

THE CHIPS ARE DOWN FOR EXPERT WHO FAILED TO DECLARE AN INTEREST

July 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

In The Ritz Hotel Casino Ltd -v- Al Geabury [2015] EWHC 2294(QB) Mrs Justice Simler DBE was critical of an expert who failed to declare an interest in a case. The expert had become a treating doctor. “It was no…

THAT "PARTIAL" ADMISSION: IT IS STILL BINDING AND YOU MAY NOT BE ALLOWED TO RESILE FROM IT

July 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice William Davis in Cavell -v- Transport for London [2015] EWCA 2283 (QB) has some important observations in relation to admissions and attempts to resile from admissions. “It cannot be in those interests to permit the…

COSTS AND CONDUCT 3: THE COURT OF APPEAL AND ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

This is the third case today about the issue of costs and the conduct of proceedings. It is the most  complex, Smith & Nephew plc -v- ConvaTec Technologies Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 803. THE CASE The Court of Appeal allowed…

COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST "EXPERT WITNESSES" ARE NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision of the Divisional Court in Accident Exchange Ltd -v- Nathan John George-Broom & Ors [2015] EWHC 2205 (Admin) is certainly a development in the practice relating to dismissal. THE CASE The claimants applied to commit a number of…

COSTS AND CONDUCT 2: LOSER PAYS ALL APPLIES: MOORE IS NOT LESS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In The London Borough of Tower Hamlets -v- The London Borough of Bromley [2015] EWHC 2271 (Ch) Mr Justice Norris refused an application for an issue based order and made an order for costs under the general rule that the…

COSTS & CONDUCT 1: MULTIPLE PARTIES, "BULLOCK" AND "SANDERSON" ORDERS AND INDEMNITY COSTS TO THE DEFENDANTS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There are several cases today where the courts have considered the issue of where costs should fall and how judicial discretion should be exercised.  The first we consider is Asghar -v- Ahmad [2015] EWHC 2234 (QB) a decision of Mr…

OUCH! THINKING OF DRAFTING A COSTS BUDGET? BEST READ THIS FIRST

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in GSK Project Management Ltd -v- QPR Holdings Ltd [2015] EWHC 2274 (TCC) is one that needs to read by anyone involved in preparing a costs budget. To say the judge was critical of…

THE PRIMACY OF ORAL TESTIMONY: ABSENT WITNESSES ORDERED TO ATTEND AND LATE AMENDMENTS REFUSED: ALL IN ONE CASE

July 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is an interesting report of two separate decisions of Mr Justice Peter Smith in Harb -v- HRH Price Abdul Aziz Bin Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz [2015] EWHC 2195 (Ch). This relates to two decisions made on the first day…

IF YOU ENTER INTO A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT WITH YOUR CLIENT ARE YOU PLAYING RUSSIAN ROULETTE?

July 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Master Campbell in Addleshaw Goddard LLP  -v- Wood & Hellard [2015] EWHC B12 (Costs) has some interesting observations on contentious business agreements and the nature of litigation financing generally. THE CASE The claimant solicitors had entered into…

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: THE CENTRAL BANK OF ECUADOR CASE REVISITED: THE OCEAN FROST APPROACH

July 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content

I have already posted an article on the Privy Council decision in Central Bank of Ecuador -v- Conticort CA [2015] UKPC 11. It was a remarkable case in that the Privy Council overturned findings of fact of the trial judge. In…

NEW RULES RELATING TO "NEUTRAL EVALUATION" ; LITIGANTS IN PERSON; ASSESSMENT; SPECIALIST FINANCIAL LIST (AND MORE…)

July 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

New rules have been introduced which (for the most part) come into force on the 1st October 2015.  Here we look at the key changes. THE RULES The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.4) Rules 2014 were laid before Parliament on the…

THIS "PROBLEM" WITH WITNESSES: IT IS NOT A ONE WAY STREET: DEFENDANT'S EVIDENCE NOT BELIEVED

July 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Much attention is, rightly, paid to the actions of evidence of claimants who bring fraudulent claims or give untrue evidence. However it is important to remember that this issue with evidence is not a one way street.  There are plenty…

ADVISING ON THE "RISKS OF LITIGATION": A HIGH COURT DECISION

July 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Liability, Members Content

In Thomas -v- Albutt [2015] EWHC Mr Justice Morgan considered, among other things, the duty owed by a barrister (and lawyers generally) to warn about the risks of litigation. “Clients, I know, want two inconsistent things. They want confident advice…

POST MITCHELL PRE-DENTON RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL: MITCHELL PRINCIPLES WERE NOT HERE TO STAY

July 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The appeal in Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd -v- Sinclair [2015] EWCA Civ 774 involves the Court of Appeal considering the Mitchell/Denton divide. KEY POINTS The Court overturned a decision, made post-Mitchell but prior to Denton, where a judge refused…

THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS OF QOCS: IMPORTANT AND INTERESTING DECISION: THE MEANING OF "PROCEEDINGS"

July 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

There is an interesting decision on checkmylegalfees.com website in relation to the transitional provisions of the QOCS regulations.  The full transcript of Casseldine -v- The Diocese of Llandaff Board for Social Responsibility (Regional Costs Judge Phillips, Cardiff County Court 15th…

THINKING OF ALLEGING OR PLEADING FRAUD: BETTER READ THIS FIRST

July 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In NGM Sustainable Developments Ltd -v- Wallis [2015] EWHC 2089 (Ch) Mr Justice Peter Smith highlighted the importance of full and accurate pleading of a case alleging fraud. “…in commercial matters the parties and their lawyers tend to work long…

STRIKING OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS BECAUSE OF IRRELEVANT MATERIAL AND "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS" IN RELATION TO CHANGES OF COSTS BUDGETS

July 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Witness statements

The Mitchell libel case led to a number of interlocutory hearings and applications, some of which had a profound effect on civil procedure (for a while at least). The case of Yeo -v- Times Newspapers Ltd  is also leading to…

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS NOT SENT TO COVENTRY: KEY POINTS AND LINKS

July 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The decision in Coventry -v- Lawrence [2015] UKSC 50 has not led to any major change in practice and procedure (in relation to a costs regime that had already ended anyway). A link to the judgment is here  KEY POINTS…

JUSTICE COMMITTEE INQUIRY IN THE EFFECTS OF THE INCREASE IN COURT FEES: HOW TO RESPOND

July 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

The Justice Committee is holding an inquiry into the effects of the introduction and levels of the increased court fees. If anyone wants to send their responses to this blog, in addition to the inquiry, I will arrange a specific…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM – FURTHER PROBLEMS: YOU CANNOT ALWAYS RELY ON WHAT YOU ARE TOLD

July 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

Service of the claim form is an issue that continues to cause problems.  There is a brief report on Lawtel today of the decision of Stewart J in Dzekova -v- Thomas Eggar PPL (QBD 17/07/2015)*.  It is another example of…

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 … 10 Next →

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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
  • “OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS

Top Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"
  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE "OPINION" EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014

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

 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.