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. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » 2016 » July » 27

CLAIMANT ESTOPPED FROM RELYING ON QOCS: THE NEED TO BE ACCURATE

July 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, QOCS, Uncategorized

I am grateful to barrister Matthew White for sending me details and a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Lopez in Price -v- Egbert H Taylor &  Company Limited (16th June 2016).  This is the second judgment in the…

HAS A PART 36 OFFER BEEN BEATEN WHEN THE VALUE OF CURRENCY CHANGES? A HIGH COURT DECISION

July 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Part 36, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Leggatt today in Novus Aviation Ltd -v- Alubaf Arab International Bank BSC (c) [2016] EWHC 1937 (Comm) contains some interesting observations on Part 36 offers. KEY POINTS A claimant “beat” its own Part 36 offer…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2022. 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 26,333 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER 2: THERE WAS NO MISCONDUCT BY THE CLAIMANTS, HOWEVER THE COSTS OF ARGUING ABOUT CONDUCT WERE NOT ALLOWED
  • COSTS INCURRED PRIOR TO DEFENDANT’S BREACH ARE RECOVERABLE: THEY WERE “INCIDENTAL” TO THE APPLICATION
  • THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: A WORKING EXAMPLE: THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: HOURS, SUPERVISION AND THE USE OF COUNSEL
  • THE REDUCTION OF A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S COSTS BECAUSE OF CONDUCT: RELEVANT CALDERBANK OFFERS CONSIDERED: RECOVERABLE COSTS REDUCED BY 15% AND 60%
  • SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS NOT GOOD SERVICE: A CLAIMANT NEEDS A SPECIFIC STATEMENT THAT SERVICE WILL BE ACCEPTED: APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME REFUSED

Top Posts & Pages

  • SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS NOT GOOD SERVICE: A CLAIMANT NEEDS A SPECIFIC STATEMENT THAT SERVICE WILL BE ACCEPTED: APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME REFUSED
  • THE REDUCTION OF A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT'S COSTS BECAUSE OF CONDUCT: RELEVANT CALDERBANK OFFERS CONSIDERED: RECOVERABLE COSTS REDUCED BY 15% AND 60%
  • THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: A WORKING EXAMPLE: THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: HOURS, SUPERVISION AND THE USE OF COUNSEL
  • SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: THERE WAS PROCEDURAL UNFAIRNESS IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS, HOWEVER THE RESULT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SAME
  • COSTS INCURRED PRIOR TO DEFENDANT'S BREACH ARE RECOVERABLE: THEY WERE "INCIDENTAL" TO THE APPLICATION

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

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • Website of 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, Catastrophic Injury Group
  • 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 © 2022 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin