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 » 2016 » March » 28
BOOK REVIEW: THE ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE AND E-DISCLOSURE HANDBOOK: ESSENTIAL INFORMATION IN BYTE SIZED CHUNKS

BOOK REVIEW: THE ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE AND E-DISCLOSURE HANDBOOK: ESSENTIAL INFORMATION IN BYTE SIZED CHUNKS

March 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Book Review, Case Management, Civil evidence, Disclosure, Litigation Privilege,, Uncategorized

Peter Hibbert has written an impressive work, The Electronic Evidence and E-Disclosure Handbook.    Does it deserve a place on your bookshelf?  I have a quick review and a longer review.  They both lead to the same conclusion.   THE SHORT…

SECTION 33: CERTAIN FALLACIES DISPLACED

March 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Uncategorized

Each application under s.33 of the Limitation Act 1980 is, of course, unique. It is interesting, however to examine the decision of Her Honour Judge Walden Smith (sitting as a High Court judge) in Sanderson -v- City of Bradford City…

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.
In-House Webinar

Subscribe to Blog via Email

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

Join 22,677 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • PROVING THINGS 203: EVIDENCE AND SCOTT SCHEDULES IN COERCIVE CONTROL CASES: SCOTT SCHEDULES “INEFFECTIVE AND FREQUENTLY UNSUITABLE”
  • ANOTHER WITNESS STATEMENT THAT STRAYED INTO INADMISSIBLE ARGUMENTS, PROTRACTED COMMENTARY AND EXPERT EVIDENCE
  • CLAIMANTS SUED THE WRONG (NON-EXISTENT) DEFENDANT – AND THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAD EXPIRED: DON’T START BREAKING THE CROCKERY JUST YET
  • PROVING THINGS 201: THE WHITE LION HOTEL CASE AND PROVING BREACH OF DUTY BY AN OCCUPIER
  • LAWFULNESS OF DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

Top Posts & Pages

  • CLAIMANTS SUED THE WRONG (NON-EXISTENT) DEFENDANT - AND THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAD EXPIRED: DON'T START BREAKING THE CROCKERY JUST YET
  • PROVING THINGS 203: EVIDENCE AND SCOTT SCHEDULES IN COERCIVE CONTROL CASES: SCOTT SCHEDULES "INEFFECTIVE AND FREQUENTLY UNSUITABLE"
  • ANOTHER WITNESS STATEMENT THAT STRAYED INTO INADMISSIBLE ARGUMENTS, PROTRACTED COMMENTARY AND EXPERT EVIDENCE
  • PROVING THINGS 201: THE WHITE LION HOTEL CASE AND PROVING BREACH OF DUTY BY AN OCCUPIER
  • TRIAL BUNDLES: TIMING, CONTENTS AND PRESENTATION : AND DO YOU KNOW SEDLEY’S LAWS?

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.
To find out more, as well as how to remove or block these, see here: Our Cookie Policy

Copyright © 2021 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin