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 » November » 09
WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL ME THAT BEFORE WE WENT INTO COURT?  THINGS LAWYERS LEARN HALF WAY THROUGH A TRIAL

WHY DIDN’T YOU TELL ME THAT BEFORE WE WENT INTO COURT? THINGS LAWYERS LEARN HALF WAY THROUGH A TRIAL

November 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The post earlier today on a case where key facts came to light on the third day of a trial led me to ask lawyers if they had similar experiences.  That sudden, and unexpected, “surprise” bit of evidence which no-one…

THE DENTON CRITERIA AND DISHONESTY: TELLING A LIE MAY NOT BE "SIGNIFICANT" BUT IT IS ALWAYS SERIOUS.

THE DENTON CRITERIA AND DISHONESTY: TELLING A LIE MAY NOT BE “SIGNIFICANT” BUT IT IS ALWAYS SERIOUS.

November 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

I am grateful to John McQuater for sending me through a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Robinson in the case of Wadsley -v- Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (a copy of that judgment is available here Wadsley…

THE THINGS YOU FIND OUT HALF WAY THROUGH A TRIAL...  A CASE VERY MUCH TO POINT

THE THINGS YOU FIND OUT HALF WAY THROUGH A TRIAL… A CASE VERY MUCH TO POINT

November 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The case of Jollah, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No. 2) [2017] EWHC 2821 (Admin) makes fascinating reading. It is an object lesson in the need to ask searching questions when representing a…

WHO WAS TELLING THE TRUTH? BOUDICCA, POSSESSORY TITLE AND THE JUDGE'S ROLE AS FACT FINDER: "DETERMINED COMPETITORS IN AN IMPLAUSIBILITY CONTEST"

WHO WAS TELLING THE TRUTH? BOUDICCA, POSSESSORY TITLE AND THE JUDGE’S ROLE AS FACT FINDER: “DETERMINED COMPETITORS IN AN IMPLAUSIBILITY CONTEST”

November 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In McClelland v Elvin & Ors [2017] EWHC 2795 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered an appeal where the trial judge had found against a party claiming adverse possession. There are some interesting observations in relation to Roman Britain, grounds of…

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

  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THOSE WHO DRAFTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS “HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT THE ROLE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT IS”: A USEFUL CHECKLIST AND LINKS TO KEEP YOU ON THE STRAIGHT AND NARROW
  • SERVICE POINTS 54: THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A SEALED CLAIM FORM IN TIME: THERE WAS NO OBLIGATION ON A DEFENDANT TO MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 7.7: THE ACTION BITES THE DUST
  • THE DIFFICULTIES WHEN MAKING A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS OF THE SELF-EMPLOYED OR SOMEONE INVOLVED IN SPORTS OR ENTERTAINMENT: WEBINAR 29TH SEPTEMBER 2026
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS : THE COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT ON A POINT NOT PLEADED: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STATEMENT OF THE AGREED ISSUES FOR TRIAL
  • COST BITES 450: IF THE CLAIMANT SUCCEEDED ON A CASE THAT WAS NOT PLEADED SHOULD IT THEN PAY THE DEFENDANTS’ COSTS?

Top Posts

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"
THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME BEFORE THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE: THE COURT DOES NOT CONSIDER DENTON PRINCIPLES EVEN IF THE APPLICANT FAILS TO MEET THEIR OWN PROPOSED TIMETABLE
THROWBACK FRIDAY: ADVISING CLIENTS AS TO THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”: CASES AND GUIDANCE (SEPTEMBER 2018)
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE RIGHT TO REPLY: WHEN MUST YOU DO IT AND WHEN SHOULD YOU DO IT? THE CRITICAL IMPORTANCE OF A DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM

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.