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 » October » 31
PROVING THINGS 69: SOLICITORS EVIDENCE OF (THEIR OWN) LOSS "WHOLLY INADEQUATE": IMPORTANT POINTS ABOUT DELAY TOO

PROVING THINGS 69: SOLICITORS EVIDENCE OF (THEIR OWN) LOSS “WHOLLY INADEQUATE”: IMPORTANT POINTS ABOUT DELAY TOO

October 31, 2017 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog often reports on cases where a party fails to appreciate the scope and depth of evidence needed to prove a claim for damages. This issue arose in the judgment today in  Hersi & Co Solicitors, R (On the Application…

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

  • COST BITES 402: DOES THE FACT THAT LEGAL FEES HAVE BEEN PAID BY RELATIVES MEAN THAT A RESPONDENT IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS? THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE CONSIDERED
  • ASSESSORS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL IN ADMIRALTY CASES: WHY WERE THEY NECESSARY? APPELLANTS MAY HAVE SUFFERED FROM THAT SINKING FEELING …
  • DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: THE SOLICITORS CONDUCT WAS A “MATTER OF VERY REAL CONCERN” – BUT THE APPLICATION WAS GRANTED
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 80: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM “FAILED TO FORMULATE A LEGALLY RECOGNISABLE CASE AGAINST EACH DEFENDANT”: THE ACTION WAS STRUCK OUT
  • THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES: THE KEY POINTS AND SEVEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.