One Response
Comments are closed.
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 12.4K other subscribers
Recent Posts
- SERVICE POINTS 37 : IS SERVICE ON A P.0. BOX GOOD SERVICE? (OH – AND BY THE WAY – AS IT TURNS OUT – THE CLAIM FORM WAS NEVER, IN FACT, SERVED AT ALL): A BIT OF A SURPRISE FOR THE CLAIMANT AT THE APPEAL STAGE
- WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 29th APRIL 2026
- COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 4: WHY IS PD57AC BREACHED SO OFTEN? “SOLICITORS MIGHT FEEL UNDER PRESSURE TO SIGN CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE … EVEN WHEN THEY KNOW THAT STATEMENTS WERE NOT COMPLIANT…”
- COST BITES 379: HIGH COURT JUDGE UPHOLDS DECISION THAT INTERIM BILLS WERE STATUTE BILLS AND THAT THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT SEEK ASSESSMENT OUT OF TIME
- OPENING LINES TO START THE WEEK: “FOR CENTURIES, IT HAS BEEN RECOGNISED THAT HUMAN HEARING CAN BE DAMAGED BY EXPOSURE TO LOUD NOISE”
Top Posts
- SERVICE POINTS 37 : IS SERVICE ON A P.0. BOX GOOD SERVICE? (OH - AND BY THE WAY - AS IT TURNS OUT - THE CLAIM FORM WAS NEVER, IN FACT, SERVED AT ALL): A BIT OF A SURPRISE FOR THE CLAIMANT AT THE APPEAL STAGE
- OPENING LINES TO START THE WEEK: "FOR CENTURIES, IT HAS BEEN RECOGNISED THAT HUMAN HEARING CAN BE DAMAGED BY EXPOSURE TO LOUD NOISE"
- BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN YOU ARE SEEKING PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE THE COURT HAS TO KNOW HOW MUCH IT WILL ALL COST...
- COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 4: WHY IS PD57AC BREACHED SO OFTEN? "SOLICITORS MIGHT FEEL UNDER PRESSURE TO SIGN CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE ... EVEN WHEN THEY KNOW THAT STATEMENTS WERE NOT COMPLIANT..."
- COST BITES 379: HIGH COURT JUDGE UPHOLDS DECISION THAT INTERIM BILLS WERE STATUTE BILLS AND THAT THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT SEEK ASSESSMENT OUT OF TIME
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
What I like is a DJ allowing a budget for 2 experts for 2 days when it is likely to be a 5 day trial, and a small amount for attendance at trial (a trainee or grade C can sit behind Counsel…) when the case involves medical negligence resulting in a fatality. “Is it worth it?” says the judge. Well I guess a judgment dealing with how your mum died might matter to some people.
Sure, quantum isn’t over £10k (bit of pain plus funeral costs) but what will the trial judge say if every day after the initial 2 days they are faced with an application to vary the budget? That or everyone for the claimant walks out because they won’t be paid to stay.
And the court in question doesn’t allow applications at the pre-trial review stage, so no applications to vary the budget.
I’m not happy at having to rely on the costs judge’s discretion not being fettered and allowing the budget to be exceeded if good reason can be shown – what is the point of that when the judge that did the budget couldn’t figure out what was what?
Mutter mutter
H