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 » 13
SORRY SILKS: IMPORTANT AS YOU ARE THE CASE IS NOT BEING HELD UP FOR YOU: THE TAIL IS NOT GOING TO WAG THE DOG

SORRY SILKS: IMPORTANT AS YOU ARE THE CASE IS NOT BEING HELD UP FOR YOU: THE TAIL IS NOT GOING TO WAG THE DOG

November 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd [2017] EWHC 2844 (QB) contains some telling observations about case management, listing and the need to comply with the overriding objective. “Fitting hearings around [counsel’s] availability has…

SUING THE WRONG DEFENDANT? SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS?

SUING THE WRONG DEFENDANT? SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS?

November 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Parties to actions

It is always embarrassing to find out you are suing the wrong defendant and have to apply for substitution (although we have looked at cases in which the wrong claimant has issued proceedings).  This issue was considered by Mr Justice…

COSTS BUDGETING AND PROPORTIONALITY  TEST APPLY - EVEN IN A CASE FOR £350 MILLION

COSTS BUDGETING AND PROPORTIONALITY TEST APPLY – EVEN IN A CASE FOR £350 MILLION

November 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality

in Sharp & Ors v Blank & Ors [2017] EWHC 141 (Ch)  Mr Justice Nugee considered the issue of proportionality in a case where £350 million was at stake. Mr Justice Nugee decided that the requirement for costs budgeting, and proportionality,…

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

  • ASKING THE JUDGE QUESTIONS AFTER JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED: THEY HAVE TO BE NECESSARY TO ENABLE THE PARTIES TO UNDERSTAND THE REASONING OF THE DECISION (AND THESE GO TOO FAR…)
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 83: THE CASE OF THE SOLICITOR’S LIEN: THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE DECIDED AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT ON THE BASIS OF AN UNPLEADED CASE
  • THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON SUPERVISION 7: RECORDING ARRANGMENTS (IF IT ISN’T WRITTEN DOWN IT HASN’T HAPPENED…)
  • AN APPLICATION TO SET A DEFAULT JUDGMENT ASIDE (3): THE DENTON CRITERIA CONSIDERED
  • AN APPLICATION TO SET A DEFAULT JUDGMENT ASIDE (2): CONSIDERATION OF “PROMPTNESS” WHEN NOTHING HAPPENED FOR A YEAR…

Top Posts

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.