5 Responses
Comments are closed.
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 16.8K other subscribers
Recent Posts
- AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..
- WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
- COST BITES 375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: “VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL”
- MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
- THROWBACK FRIDAY (1): ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION (APRIL 2015)
Top Posts
- THE JUDGE FOUND AGAINST ME BECAUSE THEY GAVE TOO MUCH LEEWAY TO A LITIGANT IN PERSON : ALLEGATIONS OF THIS KIND SHOULD BE PARTICULARISED (AND CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT)
- WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
- SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF DELAY AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
- THROWBACK FRIDAY (1): ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION (APRIL 2015)
- COST BITES 374: IF THIS WAS A CBA THE UNILATERAL ABILITY TO VARY RATES WOULD HAVE LED TO IT BEING SET ASIDE ON THE GROUNDS IT WAS UNREASONABLE
Archives
Blogroll
Books
Useful Links
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
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
I wonder what solicitors actually get paid for and how many understand how to properly instruct and prepare their own counsel. Far too many firms get a junior to photocopy a mountain of paper and shove it in bundles with no understanding at all of what they are doing. Well prepped bundles are a great tactical advantage. Annoying the judge immensely a couple of weeks before he sees the case is madness. Needless to say; when as an unrepresented litigant with no legal training I appeared (successfully) at the CA my bundles were immaculate 😉
I tend to think that, if the only complaint Dingemans could come up was that “I” looks like “1”, he was a very lucky judge. Judges should remember that litigants are hoping for justice and are not there to listen to well-paid judges moaning about the numbering/lettering of bundles.
The truth of this matter is that most of the judges who complain about bundles will have appeared as counsel in many cases in which the bundles were less than perfect (or contained reams of material which was never referred to at trial).
Tim, see the response above. A litigant in person presents bundles that are “immaculate”. The reason bundles have such a high profile on this blog is because they can save (or waste) court time. It was a perfectly proper observation. The fact that bad practice occurred in the past cannot be a justification for not trying to improve things.
Yes Tim. That is obviously because bundles are prepared by solicitors not barristers.
Gordon maybe you could do a blog highlighting the Supreme Court bundling service thingy. Available for electronic filing in courts which allow or printing otherwise for normal service in all courts. Judges seem to love it. You could even carry an add of theirs and earn a few shekels to eke out your meagre pay at the bar. 😉