Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » 2016 » January

EVIDENCE, DAMAGES AND A SOLICITOR'S GOODWILL

January 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The Court of Appeal decision in Karim -v- Wemyss [2016] EWCA Civ 27 has already received some publicity, involving as it does litigation following the sale of a solicitor’s practice.  However the decision also shows the dangers of not bringing…

EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A RISKY BUSINESS

January 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

In Medhi Kohsravi -v- British American Tobacco PLC [2016] EWHC 123 (QB)Sir David Eady stated that he would have set aside an order extending time for service of the claim form. It is a timely warning that obtaining an extension…

PICKING UP BAD CITATIONS: & SKELETON ARGUMENTS – STILL TOO LONG:

January 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

In an afternote to his judgement in Commercial Management (Investments) Ltd -v- Mitchell Design and Construct Ltd [2016] EWHC 76 (TCC) Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart added his voice to the many judges who have commented on the excessive length of skeleton…

COSTS,INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION PROCEEDINGS: (OR "COPPERS COP IT")

January 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Contribution proceedings, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Mohidin -v-Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2016] EWHC 105 (QB) Mr Justice Gilbart carried out an extensive review of the principles relating to contribution proceedings and costs. KEY POINTS Two police officers who had been involved in the…

LATE AMENDMENT ALLOWED: TRIAL DATE MOVED: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

January 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

In G -v- Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Appeal [2016] EWHC 104 (QB) Mrs Justice May granted the claimant permission to amend the Particulars of Claim even though this meant moving a 7 day trial listed in early April…

COURT FEES: LINKS FOR TODAY

January 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

The links section is an integral part of this blog. For today, however, I wanted to take those links on the issue of court fees and put them in a post of their own.  That is the responses today to…

VARYING JUDGMENT ENTERED BY CONSENT: CAUSATION, APPEALS AND "NEW" EVIDENCE

January 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Admissions, Amendment, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Atkins -v- The Co-operative Group [2016] EWHC 80 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone varied  a consent order giving judgment for the claimant on liability.  The appeal against the order was not made until six months after the judgment was entered….

WAIVING PRIVILEGE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: ANOTHER HIGH COURT DECISION

January 25, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The question of waiving privilege in witness statements has been considered several times on this blog. The case of Commodities Research Unit International (Holdings) Ltd -v- King and Wood Mallesons LLP [2016] EWHC 63 (QB) shows that privilege can be…

KERRY UNDERWOOD ON QOCS: A REVIEW

KERRY UNDERWOOD ON QOCS: A REVIEW

January 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Book Review, Civil evidence, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

A review of QOCS, Section 57 and Set off. Kerry Underwood. £25.00. Available online here Qualified one way costs shifting is here to stay.  It may be extended to other areas.  A detailed knowledge of the rules and regulations is…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, "MATERIALITY" & CONSIDERING THE MERITS IN A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL OF RELIEF ALLOWED

January 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Uncategorized

In Joshi & Welch Limited -v- Tay Foods [2015] EWHC 3905 (QB) Mr Justice Green allowed an appeal where the judge a first instance refused to grant relief from sanctions.  Much centred on the definition of the word “material”.  The…

COSTS AFTER A SPLIT TRIAL: PART 36; UNNECESSARY EXPERT REPORTS; PROPORTIONALITY AND USELESS BUNDLES: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE

January 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The short judgment of Mr Justice Males in C&S  Associates UK Limited -v- Enterprise Insurance Company PLC [2016] EWHC 67 (Comm) encapsulates many of the problems of contemporary litigation. “It is important that those litigating in this court are aware…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY, ATTENDANCE NOTES AND FINDINGS OF FACT

January 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Mansion Estates Ltd -v- Hayre & Co (A Firm) [2016] EWHC 96 (Ch) His Honour Judge Saffman (sitting as a judge of the High Court) went, carefully, through the principles relating to witness credibility and findings of fact. Given…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATIONS: 10 POINTS TO IMPROVE THE ODDS

January 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

It is now just over 18 months since the Denton decision. Cases in relation to relief from sanction are still being reported regularly.  It is clear that default remains a problem and an issue within the civil courts. Further it…

LORD CHIEF JUSTICE'S REPORT 2015: CIVIL WORK

January 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

The Lord Chief Justice’s Report 2015 covers a number of issues.  Of particular interest to civil practitioners. The Briggs Review is summarised. There is an emphasis on control of litigation costs and court fees “The Jackson review reforms have now…

EVIDENCE, PROOF AND DOCUMENTS: MEDICAL RECORDS NOT DEFINITIVE OF CONDITION

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mrs Justice Patterson DBE in Hunt -v- Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 47 (QB) is one where the claimant succeeded in establishing negligence on the part of the defendant Trust. However there is an interesting…

PERMISSION NOT GRANTED TO CALL EMPLOYMENT EXPERTS: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Various Claimants -v- Sir Robert McAlpine [2016] EWHC 45 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone and Master Leslie considered the rules and case law in relation to the need to call expert witnesses in detail. KEY POINTS The claimants were refused…

JUDGMENT IN OTHER PROCEEDINGS ARE NOT EVIDENCE

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

A short passage in the judgment of Mrs Justice Lang DBE in Daniel -v- St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 23 (QB) highlights the point that the conclusions in other proceedings are not evidence in a civil trial. KEY…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: NO PERMISSION TO SERVE RESPONDENT'S NOTICE LATE

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Pipe -v- Spicerhaart Estate Agents Ltd [2016] EWHC 61 QB Mr Justice Sweeney refused permission to serve a Respondent’s notice late. “Against the background that this is a small claims case, the conduct of the Respondent in relation to…

DECISION NOT TO ADMIT LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

January 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is a brief report on Lawtel of the decision in Judges Sykes Frixous -v- Bhabra (CA 14/010/2016).*  This provides another example of a party (unsuccessfully) trying to serve witness evidence late in the day.  There are numerous posts on…

NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AFTER BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

January 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Security for Costs, Uncategorized

In Sinclair -V- Dorsey & Whitney (Europe) LLP [2015] EWHC 3888 (Comm) Mr Justice refused an application from relief from sanctions. (I am grateful to Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd for sending me a copy of the transcript). “The starting point is…

ANOTHER CASE OF INDEMNITY COSTS BECAUSE OF A REFUSAL TO MEDIATE

January 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision on Master Simons in Bristow  -v- The Princess Alexander Hospital NHS Trust [2015] EWHC B22 (Costs) contains examples of two mistakes that can be made on assessment of costs. The most telling is the defendant’s failure to respond…

PART 36, THE COMPENSATION RECOVERY UNIT AND COSTS: A SIGNIFICANT COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

January 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Crooks -v- Hendricks Lovell Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 8 the Court of Appeal considered some significant issues in relation to the interrelationship between Part 36 and the CRU situation in personal injury cases. KEY POINTS A claimant who recovered…

A POTENTIAL BENEFICIARY CANNOT BRING AN ACTION ON BEHALF OF AN ESTATE

January 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Parties to actions, Uncategorized

The facts in Haastrup -v- Okorie [2016] EWHC 12 (Ch) are somewhat complex. However they do bring home some important matters in relation to the need to have capacity to bring proceedings on behalf of an estate.  The judgment of…

SERVICE BY EMAIL IS GOOD SERVICE: FAMILY COURT DECISION

January 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Electronic service,, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

Issues of electronic service are still relatively novel.  Some interesting issues were addressed by Mostyn J in Maughan -v- Wilmot [2015] EWHC 29 (Fam).  This is a family case where important observations are made in relation to service by email…

APPLICATIONS FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE MUST BE MADE PRE-ACTION (NOT A GREAT SURPRISE THIS)

January 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Personal Management Solutions Ltd -v- Gee 7 Group Wealth Limited [2015] EWHC 3859(Ch) Mr Justice Morgan decided that applications for pre-action disclosure must be made pre-disclosure. The court did not have jurisdiction to make such an application once proceedings…

FIXED COSTS, PART 36 AND THE PROTOCOL: A DIFFERENT OUTCOME

January 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

NB this decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal. Broadhurst -v- Tan [2016] EWCA Civ 94. The post earlier today on fixed costs after Part 36 offers led Benjamin Williams QC to, kindly, send me a decision of Smith -v-…

LATE SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM, EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND RESTORATION TO THE REGISTER: IT DOESN'T END WELL

January 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

The decision in Hyfield Estates Ltd -v- Eggar [2015] EWHC 3773 (QB) (His Honour Judge Peter Hughes QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court) provides another example of the dangers of late service of the claim form “It…

CIVIL COURTS STRUCTURE REVIEW: LINKS

January 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized

The Civil Courts Structure Review has potentially profound changes to the structure of the civil courts. Here are links to the key documents The report itself is available here The Welcoming Statement is available here  The press summary can be…

FIXED COSTS AND CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS

January 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Damages, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

This case must be read with the Court of decision in Broadhurst -v- Tan [2016] EWCA Civ 94.  This effectively overrides this decision. Fixed costs do not apply when indemnity costs are ordered.  There is a report, helpfully put online by…

LIMITATION, PAIN AND ANGUISH: A GENTLE REMINDER ABOUT NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTIONS (1)

January 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

Most New Year’s resolutions last 24 days. In an effort to keep litigators on board for the whole of the year in relation to the Resolutions for Litigators for 2016  I am doing a series of short reminders about the…

NEW EVIDENCE ALLOWED AFTER HEARING: A HIGH COURT DECISION

January 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Swift Advances PLc -v- Ahmed [2015] EWHC 3265 (Ch) Mr Justice Norris permitted new evidence to be adduced after evidence and submissions had been completed. “..it may be expected that courts will allow fresh evidence when to refuse it…

THE DANGERS OF NOT PAYING THE CORRECT COURT FEE: CASES BARRED BY LIMITATION BECAUSE WRONG COURT FEE WAS PAID

January 6, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Richard Lewis & Others -v- Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch) Mr John Male QC   summary judgment was given for the defendants on the grounds that a deliberate decision to pay an incorrect court fee on issue meant…

WITNESSES: PERSONAL ATTENDANCE, VIDEO LINKS AND DEPOSITIONS

January 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In another decision in the Kimathi -v- Foreign and Commonwealth Office [2015] EWHC 3684 (QB)  case Mr Justice Stewart considered the question of whether witnesses should attend court, use video link or whether depositions should be taken. “the general rule…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, FRAUD AND THE CHANGING SITUATION

January 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

I must preface this post with the warning that it is not possible to cite decisions relating to  permission to appeal.  However the decision in Bawden -v- WM Morrison Supermarkets PLC [2015] EWCA Civ 957 is interesting in itself. The…

INADEQUATE WITNESS STATEMENTS, A "CULTURE OF NON-COMPLIANCE" AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE

January 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The decision of District Judge Hickman in the small claims case of Thakar -v- The Secretary of State for Justice [2015] EW Misc B44 is one that is likely to attract a lot of attention given that it was a…

USING WITNESS STATEMENTS PREPARED IN ANOTHER ACTION: WHEN IS A "HEARING HELD IN PUBLIC"

January 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

CPR 32.12 prevents witness statements served in an action being used for any other purpose.  However there is an exception when a statement is “put in evidence at a hearing held in public”.  This issue was considered in Kimathi -v- Foreign…

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 35.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • A DECISION OF PROFOUND PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE TO SOLICITORS: WHEN IS SOMEONE EMPLOYED BY A SOLICITOR ENTITLED TO “CONDUCT” LITIGATION? A HIGH COURT DECISION THAT WILL HAVE WIDESPREAD RAMIFICATIONS
  • COST BITES 290: BARRISTERS TAKE CARE: ANOTHER REASON THE DBAS WERE INVALID – FAILURE TO INCLUDE COUNSEL’S FEES IN THE EQUATION…
  • COST BITES 289: INVALID DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS MEANT THAT THE APPELLANTS COULD NOT RECOVER £1.3 MILLION IN COSTS (A BAD DAY OUT FOR THE LAWYERS INVOLVED…)
  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 2: TRANSFER OF HOUSE TO CIVIL PARTNER SET ASIDE: ARE ATTEMPTS TO AVOID PAYMENT WORTH THE CANDLE?
  • COST BITES 288: IS IT REALLY GOING TO COST £39,967.50 TO HOLD A MEETING BETWEEN LAWYERS? (AND THERE WILL BE TEN OF THEM…)

Top Posts

  • A DECISION OF PROFOUND PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE TO SOLICITORS: WHEN IS SOMEONE EMPLOYED BY A SOLICITOR ENTITLED TO "CONDUCT" LITIGATION? A HIGH COURT DECISION THAT WILL HAVE WIDESPREAD RAMIFICATIONS
  • COST BITES 289: INVALID DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS MEANT THAT THE APPELLANTS COULD NOT RECOVER £1.3 MILLION IN COSTS (A BAD DAY OUT FOR THE LAWYERS INVOLVED...)
  • COST BITES 288: IS IT REALLY GOING TO COST £39,967.50 TO HOLD A MEETING BETWEEN LAWYERS? (AND THERE WILL BE TEN OF THEM...)
  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 2: TRANSFER OF HOUSE TO CIVIL PARTNER SET ASIDE: ARE ATTEMPTS TO AVOID PAYMENT WORTH THE CANDLE?
  • COST BITES 290: BARRISTERS TAKE CARE: ANOTHER REASON THE DBAS WERE INVALID - FAILURE TO INCLUDE COUNSEL'S FEES IN THE EQUATION...

Archives

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 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 National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2023
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • www.Bailii.org

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
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2025 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.