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 » June » 19
GET £15,000 FOR YOUR COSTS PAY £20,000 IN COSTS: CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT UNFAIR AND UNREASONABLE AND WAS SET ASIDE

GET £15,000 FOR YOUR COSTS PAY £20,000 IN COSTS: CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT UNFAIR AND UNREASONABLE AND WAS SET ASIDE

June 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Vilvarajah -v- West London Law Limited [2017] EWHC B23 (Costs) Master Gordon Saker declared a conditional fee agreement unreasonable and set it aside. The history and circumstances of this action make for interesting reading. “There is no correspondence between…

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST CAR HIRE FIRM: ANOTHER SKIRMISH IN A FORENSIC WAR

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST CAR HIRE FIRM: ANOTHER SKIRMISH IN A FORENSIC WAR

June 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Third party funding

The opening words of Mr Justice Turner’s judgment in Select Car Rentals (North West) Limited -v- Esure Services Limited [2017] EWHC 1434 (QB) contain an undeniable truth. The judge was upholding a decision to award costs against a car hire…

APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL TO ALLOW LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AT TRIAL: CLAIMANT'S APPEAL DISMISSED

APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL TO ALLOW LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AT TRIAL: CLAIMANT’S APPEAL DISMISSED

June 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

There are a surprising number of cases and appeals in relation to late service of witness evidence. In Byrne -v- Mullan [2017] EWHC 1387 (Ch) the claimant made an application to adduce new witness evidence which was heard on the…

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS - AN ANALYSIS 2: WHY (IN THEORY) THE DEFAULTING CLAIMANT COULD STILL RELY ON THE LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS – AN ANALYSIS 2: WHY (IN THEORY) THE DEFAULTING CLAIMANT COULD STILL RELY ON THE LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE

June 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Witness statements

In Gladwin -v- Bogescu [2017] EWHC 1287 (QB) Mr Justice Turner overturned an order giving the claimant relief from sanctions following late service of the witness statement. In the second of the series looking at the case more closely we…

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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (5): “THE HEARING WAS A SALUTARY LESSON IN HOW AI MAY PROMPT LAY PERSONS TO SAY THE RIGHT THINGS IN PLEADINGS, BUT CANNOT FURNISH THE EVIDENCE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THOSE STATEMENTS”
  • THE DUTY OF FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: USEFUL GUIDANCE AND AN ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST WHEN MAKING AN APPLICATION TO SERVE OUT…
  • A COURT SETS ASIDE AN ORDER MADE WITHOUT NOTICE: ANOTHER CASE THAT EMPHASISES THE IMPORTANCE OF FAIR PRESENTATION AT THESE APPLICATIONS: A LAWYER CANNOT SIMPLY PROMOTE A “CONSPIRACY THEORY” BUT MOST ACT OBJECTIVELY AND CAREFULLY
  • THE REPLY: THE THEME OF THE DAY: SIX USEFUL CHECKLISTS: MAKING SURE YOUR PLEADING DOESN’T FAIL THE BASIC TESTS
  • DRAFTING A DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: SOME IMPORTANT POINTS: YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH CPR 16 AND DO IT FULLY AND PROPERLY

Top Posts

THE IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AND ONE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: DECISION TO STRIKE OUT ALLOWED ON APPEAL BECAUSE THE JUDGE HAD WRONGLY CONSIDERED THE MERITS
COST BITES 449 : YOUR CASE AGAINST ME WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE YOU HAD NO PROPER CAUSE OF ACTION: SHOULD I GET 100% OF MY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS? (LIFE IS MORE NUANCED THAN THIS...)
EXPERT WATCH 71: "I DO NOT ATTACH WEIGHT TO THIS REPORT AS EXPERT EVIDENCE": THE EXPERT WAS "ADVOCATING" AND "HE TRESPASSES INTO THE ROLE RESERVED TO THE TRIBUNAL"
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (3): AI AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: VERY DANGEROUS BEDFELLOWS: TWENTY KEY POINTS
CLAIM AGAINST A SOLICITOR WAS STRUCK OUT: THERE HAD BEEN NUMEROUS PROCEDURAL DEFAULT AND THESE WOULD HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN...

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.