Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2017 » May » 02
THE PERILS OF LEAVING ISSUE TO THE LAST MINUTE: CLAIM AGAINST SOLICITORS WAS STATUTE BARRED - AMENDMENT DISALLOWED: ADDITION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTION

THE PERILS OF LEAVING ISSUE TO THE LAST MINUTE: CLAIM AGAINST SOLICITORS WAS STATUTE BARRED – AMENDMENT DISALLOWED: ADDITION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTION

May 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Amendment, Limitation, Members Content

The judgment of the Court of Appeal yesterday  in Godfrey Morgan Solicitors (a firm) -v- Armes [2017] EWCA Civ 323 illustrates the danger of late issue of proceedings.  Issue was left until the last day.  An additional defendant was added…

CANCER, CAUSATION AND THE COURTS: 25th MAY 2017:  CENTRAL LEEDS:  PROCEEDS GO TO CANCER CHARITY

CANCER, CAUSATION AND THE COURTS: 25th MAY 2017: CENTRAL LEEDS: PROCEEDS GO TO CANCER CHARITY

May 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Courses, Members Content

I am speaking with Oncologist Andrew Proctor, and my colleague Helen Rutherford in Leeds on the 25th May 2017 on “Cancer, Causation and the Courts”.  This course: Gives a medical explanation of the nature of the most common types of…

"GOOD DAYS AND BAD DAYS": THE ROLE OF VIDEO EVIDENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF CREDIBILITY AND DAMAGES

“GOOD DAYS AND BAD DAYS”: THE ROLE OF VIDEO EVIDENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF CREDIBILITY AND DAMAGES

May 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

In Karapetianas -v- Kent and Sussex Loft Conversions Ltd [2017] EWHC 859 (QB) Mr Jonathan Swift QC considered the appropriate approach to damages when the claimant’s case as to ongoing symptoms was contradicted by video evidence.  He found that the…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT & CONSIDERS THE IMPORTANT ROLE OF THE SINGLE JOINT EXPERT

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT & CONSIDERS THE IMPORTANT ROLE OF THE SINGLE JOINT EXPERT

May 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

We have already looked at the decision in Perry -v- Raleys Solicitors [2017] EWCA Civ 314 in the context of the award of interest.   The decision also contains important observations about evidence and the way in which the courts approach…

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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • TUPE DOES NOT PASS ON LIABILITIES TO THIRD PARTIES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
  • COST BITES 448: THE FINANCIAL CONDUCT AUTHORITY HAS TO PAY THE FULL COSTS OF LOSING AN ACTION: ARGUMENTS ABOUT “CHILLING EFFECT” WERE NOT ESTABLISHED AND NOT EVIDENCED IN ANY EVENT
  • COST BITES 447 : SHOULD A DEFENDANT’S DERAILMENT OF AN EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION LEAD TO INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERS BEING MADE AGAINST IT?
  • LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (2): HOW TO SPOT “FALSE” AUTHORITIES AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT (PLUS SOME USEFUL LINKS)
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (1): THREE IMPORTANT PRINCIPLES: YOU OWN THE WORK; AI IS NOT AN AUTHORITATIVE SOURCE OF LAW; IT IS NOT ENOUGH THAT THE CASE EXISTS…

Top Posts

EXPERT WATCH 70: EXPERTS' FAILURES TO REPORT ON THE RANGE OF OPINIONS LEADS TO THEIR VIEWS BEING REJECTED: ESSENTIAL READING FOR EVERY PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYER, ANYONE WHO INSTRUCTS AN EXPERT (AND ANY EXPERT...)
SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT, DENTON AND DELAY: SHOULD THE COURT REFUSE THE DEFENDANT RELIEF BECAUSE THEY HAD CAUSED UNNECESSARY DELAY AND COSTS?
DEALING WITH FISH FILES, PROCRASTINATION AND DELAY: THE LITIGATOR'S FRIEND: A REMINDER OF USEFUL LINKS, POSTS AND GUIDANCE AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: "BACKDATING LETTERS" TO DELIBERATELY MISLEAD COULD COST YOU: £4.58 MILLION IN THIS CASE: (METADATA COMES INTO PLAY NOW)
SHOULD THE COURT ORDER PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE? THE JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT SATISFIED AND THE COURT WOULD NOT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN ANY EVENT

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • 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 Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

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

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.