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 » Page 9
TWITTER, LIBEL AND EVIDENCE: THE KATIE HOPKINS JUDGMENT

TWITTER, LIBEL AND EVIDENCE: THE KATIE HOPKINS JUDGMENT

March 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Disclosure, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Warby in Monroe -v- Hopkins [2017] EWHC 433 (QB)  has already attracted a lot of attention.   Here I want to look at the issues relating to the evidence.  The case is one of the…

COURT OF APPEAL: REFUSAL TO ENGAGE WITH AN OPEN OFFER  OF SETTLEMENT IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

COURT OF APPEAL: REFUSAL TO ENGAGE WITH AN OPEN OFFER OF SETTLEMENT IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

March 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Litigants in person, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In Balk -v- Otkrite International Investment [2017] EWCA the Court of Appeal was highly critical of a litigant’s failure to respond to an open offer of settlement of appeal. The failure to engage  with an open offer of settlement amounted…

PROVING THINGS 56: A JUDGE WILL NOT SPECULATE WHEN MATTERS COULD HAVE BEEN PROVEN: COUNTERCLAIM FAILS FOR LACK OF EVIDENCE

PROVING THINGS 56: A JUDGE WILL NOT SPECULATE WHEN MATTERS COULD HAVE BEEN PROVEN: COUNTERCLAIM FAILS FOR LACK OF EVIDENCE

March 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Recorder Douglas Campbell QC in Starbuck -v- Patsystems (UK) Limited [2017] EWHC 397 (IPEC) illustrates issues in relating to recollection and credibility, it is another example of a claim (counterclaim in this case) failing because of…

LATE SKELETON ARGUMENTS, ADJOURNMENTS AND THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE

LATE SKELETON ARGUMENTS, ADJOURNMENTS AND THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE

March 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Members Content, Written advocacy

In Owgilo -v- The General Medical Council [2017] EWHC 419(Admin) Mr Justice Dove considered the situation when a witness statement was served late and the applicant requested an adjournment.  The overriding objective played a prominent part in the decisions made….

WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: ACTION BROUGHT IN TIME:  COURT'S EARLIER REFUSAL TO EXTEND DISCRETION TO EXTEND TIME OVERTURNED

WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: ACTION BROUGHT IN TIME: COURT’S EARLIER REFUSAL TO EXTEND DISCRETION TO EXTEND TIME OVERTURNED

March 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Limitation, Members Content

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Otuo -v- Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Britain [2017] EWCA Civ 136 shows the importance of calculating time periods for limitation. It shows what a difference a day makes KEY POINTS…

THE PROCESS OF TAKING A STATEMENT: EXPLORED IN DETAIL IN OPEN COURT

THE PROCESS OF TAKING A STATEMENT: EXPLORED IN DETAIL IN OPEN COURT

March 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Master Bowles in Wilson -v- Lassman [2017] EWHC 85 (Ch) contains a detailed consideration of the way in which witness evidence was obtained. It highlights the importance of having a careful record of the way in which…

SOLICITOR'S BILL AND SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES WITH £4.2 MILLION AT STAKE

SOLICITOR’S BILL AND SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES WITH £4.2 MILLION AT STAKE

March 6, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

The case of Eurasian Natural Resources -v- Dechert LLP  [2017] EWHC B4 (Costs) has already attracted much attention. A previous hearing before the Court of Appeal involved no less than five QCs just to determine whether aspects of the solicitor…

WHERE DOES THE TRUTH LIE? GESTMIN IN THE FAMILY COURTS

WHERE DOES THE TRUTH LIE? GESTMIN IN THE FAMILY COURTS

March 5, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked at the “Gestmin” guidance many times. I am grateful to Lucy Reed for pointing out that it has been considered in the context of family law. In Lachaux -v- Lachaux [2017] EWHC 385 (Fam) Mr Justice…

COSTS AGAINST NON-PARTIES: "FOR THE BENEFIT OF MR.... BAILEY"

COSTS AGAINST NON-PARTIES: “FOR THE BENEFIT OF MR…. BAILEY”

March 4, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

In Sony/ATV Music -v- WMPC Music (In liquidation) & Bailey [2017]EWHC389 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold made an award against a non-party.  The judgment reviews the relevant law in detail. “It is therefore necessary to consider what difference it would have…

A WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE IS IN PURDAH: THE ROLE OF THE LAWYER

A WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE IS IN PURDAH: THE ROLE OF THE LAWYER

March 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Members Content, Striking out, Witness statements

The Employment Tribunal decision in Chidzoy -v- BBC (available here) contains an important lesson to lawyers and litigants alike.  A witness in the course of giving evidence is in “purdah” – in that they should not discuss the case with…

THE SELF-CONFIDENT WITNESSES THAT CONVINCE THEMSELVES BUT NO-ONE CAN RELY ON

THE SELF-CONFIDENT WITNESSES THAT CONVINCE THEMSELVES BUT NO-ONE CAN RELY ON

March 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Bhullar -v- Bhullar [2017] EWHC 407 (Ch) His Honour Judge Stephen Davies had the difficult task of ascertaining the truth in that most fraught and difficult of circumstances: a family that has been in business together and then fallen out….

EXPERT WITNESSES: RARELY TOTALLY IMPARTIAL BUT SOME ARE LESS PARTIAL THAN OTHERS

EXPERT WITNESSES: RARELY TOTALLY IMPARTIAL BUT SOME ARE LESS PARTIAL THAN OTHERS

March 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There is a short passage in the judgment of His Honour Judge Hacon in Edward Lifesciences -v- Boston Scientific 2017] EWHC 405 (Pat) (03 March 2017) that encapsulate the issues surrounding the assessment of expert evidence. “Rarely, if ever, is an…

HIGH COURT WRITES AN OPEN LETTER TO LITIGANTS IN PERSON: STRIKING OUT CAN BE A BENEFIT NOT A BURDEN

HIGH COURT WRITES AN OPEN LETTER TO LITIGANTS IN PERSON: STRIKING OUT CAN BE A BENEFIT NOT A BURDEN

March 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

There are aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Walker in Chambers -v- Rooney [2017] EWHC 285 (QB) that amount to an open letter from the High Court to litigants in person. Some of the observations are aimed at everyone…

PROVING THINGS 55: I'LL SAY IT AGAIN: NO EVIDENCE - NO DAMAGES

PROVING THINGS 55: I’LL SAY IT AGAIN: NO EVIDENCE – NO DAMAGES

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

The judgment of Mrs Justice Jefford in Kingsgate Development Projects Lt -v- Jordan [2017]EWHC 343 (TCC) is (yet) another example of a claimant asserting damages but there being no evidence to prove them.  The claimant ended up with a judgment…

COMPOUND INTEREST OR SIMPLE INTEREST? COUNTING THE COPPERS: CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENT MISSES THE NET

COMPOUND INTEREST OR SIMPLE INTEREST? COUNTING THE COPPERS: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENT MISSES THE NET

March 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

In Ipswich Town Football Club Company Limited -v- The Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary [2017] EWHC 375 (QB) Mr Justice Green considered the question of whether a claimant was entitled to compound interest or simple interest. The judge gave that particular…

EXTENSIONS OF TIME UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT:  LATE APPLICATION REFUSED

EXTENSIONS OF TIME UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT: LATE APPLICATION REFUSED

February 28, 2017 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content

In MLIA -v- The Chief Constable of Hampshire Police [2017] EWHC 292 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender refused the claimants’ applications for an extension of time to bring their actions under the Human Rights Act. THE CASE The claimants brought an…

MICROSOFT, SERVICE AND FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: HIGH COURT JUDGE SAYS "NO"

MICROSOFT, SERVICE AND FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: HIGH COURT JUDGE SAYS “NO”

February 28, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

One feature of this blog  for this year has been the duty owed by litigants making without notice applications.  Another example of the problems caused can be seen in the judgment on Mr Justice Marcus Smith in Microsoft Mobile OY…

CHANGES TO THE DISCOUNT RATE: WITHDRAWING PART 36 OFFERS:  IMPORTANT FOR CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS

CHANGES TO THE DISCOUNT RATE: WITHDRAWING PART 36 OFFERS: IMPORTANT FOR CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS

February 28, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Part 36

I wrote yesterday of the practical steps that need to be taken by both parties as a result of the changes to the discount rate (that post is on the Zenith PI Blog and is available here). One point that…

PREVENTING DEFENDANT FROM DEFENDING DAMAGES IS AN APPROPRIATE MEANS OF ENFORCING PEREMPTORY ORDERS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

PREVENTING DEFENDANT FROM DEFENDING DAMAGES IS AN APPROPRIATE MEANS OF ENFORCING PEREMPTORY ORDERS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

February 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Members Content, Peremptory orders

 Workman -v- Forrester [2017] EWCA Civ 73 is an important example of the courts using peremptory orders in an attempt to secure compliance.  The Court of Appeal upheld a decision to make a peremptory order that allowed the claimants to…

EVIDENCE IN PART 8 APPLICATIONS: APPLY IN ADVANCE OR YOU WILL PROBABLY NOT BE ALLOWED TO CALL ANY

EVIDENCE IN PART 8 APPLICATIONS: APPLY IN ADVANCE OR YOU WILL PROBABLY NOT BE ALLOWED TO CALL ANY

February 26, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Civil evidence, Injunctions, Members Content, Witness statements

It is unusual to call evidence in Part 8 applications. This is made clear in the judgment of HH Walden-Smith in Wokingham Borough Council -v- Scott [2017] EWHC 294 (QB).  A party failed to make an application to call oral…

EVIDENCE IN HOLIDAY ILLNESS CLAIMS: COURSE IN LIVERPOOL: 13th MARCH 2017: 2 – 4.30

February 26, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I am presenting a course on behalf of Diversify Law Limited on “Evidence in Holiday Illness Claims”,  in Liverpool on the 13th March 2017 2 – 4.30. VENUE (CLOSE TO THE CAVERN) It is at the “Hard Days Night” Hotel….

PROVING THINGS 54: GETTING £2 IN DAMAGES AFTER CLAIMING £15 MILLION: A MARATHON EFFORT WITH NO JACKPOT

PROVING THINGS 54: GETTING £2 IN DAMAGES AFTER CLAIMING £15 MILLION: A MARATHON EFFORT WITH NO JACKPOT

February 24, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Leggatt in Marathon Asset Management LLP -v- Seddon [2017] EWHC 300 (Comm) has already attracted some publicity. It involved an award for £2 in nominal damages after the claimants had sought £15 million. It is…

MERRIX ON APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT JUDGE: COSTS BUDGETING IS AS DEFINITIVE FOR PAYING PARTY AS IT IS FOR RECEIVING PARTY: JUDGMENT TODAY

MERRIX ON APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT JUDGE: COSTS BUDGETING IS AS DEFINITIVE FOR PAYING PARTY AS IT IS FOR RECEIVING PARTY: JUDGMENT TODAY

February 24, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In the judgment today in Merrix -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 346 (QB) Mrs Justice Carr allowed an appeal about the significance of costs budgeting when it comes to assessment. “In my judgment, the answer to…

DISCLOSURE, CASE MANAGEMENT,  THE COLLATERAL USE OF DOCUMENTS AND  PROPORTIONALITY

DISCLOSURE, CASE MANAGEMENT, THE COLLATERAL USE OF DOCUMENTS AND PROPORTIONALITY

February 24, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

There are some passages in the judgment of Mr Justice Knowles in Tchenguiz -v- Grant Thornton UK LLP [2017] EWHC 310 (Comm) which highlight, succinctly, the nature of disclosure and the scope of “collateral use protection” in relation to documents…

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES:  IDENTICAL WITNESS STATEMENTS DID NOT DAMAGE CREDIBILITY (THIS TIME)

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: IDENTICAL WITNESS STATEMENTS DID NOT DAMAGE CREDIBILITY (THIS TIME)

February 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

I spent a day this week giving a seminar to a specialist group of clinical negligence lawyers on the importance of witness statements.  I mention this because, as always happens, there is a clear example of this in the judgment…

REFORMS TO SOFT TISSUE PROCESS: LINKS TO OFFICIAL PAPERS AND COMMENTARY (FROM CLAIMANTS AND INSURERS)

February 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Damages, Members Content, Rule Changes

The proposed reforms were set out in detail for the first time today.  Here are links to the relevant documents and some of the commentary: Official publications The 49 page paper from the government is here  The summary is here …

LEGAL COMPANY ENTITLED TO CHARGE FOR ITS TIME: SHACKLETON EXPLORES NEW GROUND

LEGAL COMPANY ENTITLED TO CHARGE FOR ITS TIME: SHACKLETON EXPLORES NEW GROUND

February 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In Shackleton -v-Al Shamsi [2017] EWHC 304 (Comm) Mr Justice Teare considered the question of whether a company providing legal services  which was the claimant in the action could recover costs for the time of its “proprietor”  spent in bringing…

ALL THE WITNESSES SAY EXACTLY THE SAME THING 10 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT: DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE (AND NOT BELIEVED)

ALL THE WITNESSES SAY EXACTLY THE SAME THING 10 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT: DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE (AND NOT BELIEVED)

February 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Patel -v- Patel [2017] Andrew Simmonds QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) was considering the credibility of witnesses.  The case is an interesting read in that it sets out detail of some of the cross-examination.  It…

SEXUAL ABUSE AND SECTION 33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS JUDGE’S ORDER

February 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content

In Archbishop Michael George Bowen -v- JL [2017] EWCA Civ 82 the Court of Appeal overturned a judge’s decision under section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980.  The judge had exercised the discretion in favour of the claimant. On appeal…

PROPORTIONALITY, ASSESSMENT AND PREMIUMS: THE NEED FOR CAREFUL CASE PLANNING: £72,320 REDUCED TO £24,604

February 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In Rezek-Clarke -v- Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC B5 (Costs) Master Simons upheld a decision to assess costs, claimed at £72,320.85 to £24,604.40.  The judgment emphasises the need for careful case planning, and consideration of proportionality, in…

AN ORDER UNDER THE ARBITRATION ACT IS NOT AN ORDER UNDER CPR 3.1(7)

February 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment  of Popplewell J in H -v- L [2017] EWHC 137 (Comm) relates to an application to remove an arbitrator.   Most of the judgment considers the principles relating to the independence of arbitrators.  The judge also considered points…

PROVING THINGS 53: BECAUSE A SOLICITOR WAS DISHONEST SOME OF THE TIME IT DOESN’T MEAN THEY WERE DISHONEST ALL OF THE TIME

February 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

The case of Pemberton Greenish LLP -v- Henry [2017] EWHC 246 (QB) provides an interesting assessment of witness evidence and demonstrates the difficulty in proving dishonesty. Mr Justice Jeremy Baker held that the fact that a solicitor was negligent, breached…

BABIES, BUNDLES, HUMAN RIGHTS, PROPORTIONALITY, CONDUCT AND COSTS:ALL IN ONE JUDGMENT

February 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Conduct, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Proportionality

The judgment of Mr Justice Cobb in AZ -v- Kirklees Council [2017] EWFC 11 contains much of interest to the legal profession generally.  It shows the danger of failing to comply with court directions; make or respond to appropriate offers…

ANODYNE WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHAT DOES IT TELL YOU WHEN A JUDGE PREFERS THE ORAL EVIDENCE OF A WITNESS- THAT CONTRADICTS THEIR WITNESS STATEMENT

February 16, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There is an interesting observation in the judgment of Mrs Justice Rose in Singularis Holdings Ltd -v- Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd [2017] EWHC 257 (Ch).  It may well show much about the way in which witness statements are prepared. “……

EXPERTS AND THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE: DEFENDANT ALLOWED TO RELY ON EXPERT ALSO USED BY CLAIMANT

February 15, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Wheeldon Brothers Waste Limited -v- Millennium  Insurance Company Limited [2017] EWHC 218 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson allowed the defendant to rely on an expert that had also been instructed by the claimant. The circumstances are unusual and the case needs…

PROVING THINGS 52: SOLICITOR’S NEGLIGENCE ACTION FAILS ON ALL COUNTS: NO NEGLIGENCE AND NO LOSS

February 15, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Damages, Experts, Members Content

The judgment of  HHH David Cooke today in Anderson Properties Ltd -v- Blyth Liggins [2017] EWHC 244 (Ch)  is another example of a solicitor’s negligence case failing because of the absence of basic evidence in relation to liability, causation and damages….

CONSEQUENCES OF LATE ACCEPTANCE OF CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFERS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

February 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

There is a useful report on the PIC website of a case where a claimant obtained indemnity costs after the defendant’s late acceptance of its Part 36 offer  The case of Car Craft Test Centre -v- Trotman a decision by…

THE DUTY ON EX PARTE APPLICATIONS: SOLICITOR INVOLVED NOT ALLOWED TO APPEAL TO THE COURT OF APPEAL AGAINST FINDINGS AGAINST HIM

February 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Injunctions, Members Content

I am returning to the question of the lawyer’s duty on without notice applications. In March 2015 we looked at the case of Boreh -v- Republic of Djibouti [2015] EWHC 769 (Comm)  where Mr Justice Flaux made a clear and unequivocal…

THE MODERN JUDGE AND FACT FINDING: "TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION"

THE MODERN JUDGE AND FACT FINDING: “TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION”

February 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Book Review, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a full review of Sir Mark Hedley’s book The Modern Judge on Pink Tape, where Lucy Reed explains how the book mysteriously appeared in her hotel room the morning after the Family Law Awards. (Lucy speculates that Sir…

TRIAL JUDGE’S REJECTION OF EXPERT WITNESS CREDIBILITY UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL: IF AN EXPERT KNOWS A PARTY THEY SHOULD SAY SO

February 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In EXP -v- Barker [2017]  EWCA Civ 63 the Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge’s rejection of the evidence of an expert witness. “the starting point is to identify what the judge decided. He considered that the witness had…

ORAL CLOSING SUBMISSIONS ARE IMPORTANT: USE OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS IS “UNSATISFACTORY”

February 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Written advocacy

In Pimlico Plumbers Ltd -v- Smith [2017] EWCA Civ 51 the Court of Appeal stated that oral closing submissions are important. Relying on written submissions alone represents a “considerable risk”. THE CASE The Court of Appeal was considering an appeal…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED(AFTER THE TRIAL)

February 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions

In the judgment today in  Schenk -v- Cook [2017] EWHC 144 (QB) Mr Justice Green upheld an order refusing relief from sanctions. However the appeal was heard in unusual circumstances. The judge considered the application for relief from sanctions striking…

RASTIN RESURRECTED: DO THE NEW RULES RE-INTRODUCE AUTOMATIC STRIKING OUT?

February 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Striking out

There have been comments on Twitter, and now in the Gazette, that “automatic striking out” is being introduced by the rules coming into force on the 6th April 2017.  This is true, however it is important that the rules are…

PROVING THINGS 51: NO EVIDENCE OF LOSS – NO DAMAGES: A LESSON TO SHARE

February 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

For the second time today we are looking at the judgment of Mrs Justice Proudman in Abbott -v- RCI Europe [2016] EWHC 2602 (Ch).  This time in relation to the failure of the claimants to quantify or prove they had…

YOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE IDENTICAL: NOW THAT IS A COINCIDENCE

February 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There are, it seems, litigators out there who believe that the filing of numerous identical witness statements adds weight to their case.   Advocates of this approach may want to read the judgment of  Mrs Justice Proudman in Abbott -v-…

THE JUDICIAL ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE: AN ESSENTIAL SUMMARY

February 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In  the judgment today in The Queen on the application of ASK -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 196 (Admin) Mr Justice Green sets out a template for the judicial assessment of evidence.  It provides…

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE: COSTS BUDGETING AND QADER RESULT CODIFIED

February 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2017 were made on the 3rd February.  Most of these come into force on the 6th April 2017. The new rules are available here COSTS BUDGETING The amendments set out below may be perplexing.  However…

ADMISSIBILITY OF PREVIOUS JUDGMENT AS EVIDENCE OF FOREIGN LAW

February 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

In Joint Stock Company -v- Wood [2017] EWHC 150 (Ch) Mr Justice Warren considered whether a decision by  judge in relation to foreign law was admissible as evidence. KEY POINTS A previous judgment where the judge considered and made findings…

London Seminar for PIBA MEMBERS: It’s all Counsel’s fault: key problem areas and how to manage your practice to avoid them

February 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content

Title: “It’s all Counsel’s fault: key problem areas and how to manage your practice to avoid them” Speaker: Gordon Exall, Barrister at Hardwicke, London and Zenith Chambers, Leeds.   Topics to be covered: * Your name in the law reports…

BANKERS, WITNESS STATEMENTS AND CREDIBILITY: THE ENIGMATIC WITNESS

February 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Nugee in Clydesdale Bank plc -v- Stoke Place Hotel Ltd (in administration) [2017] EWHC 181 (Ch) also contains an analysis of a witness who was “something of an enigma” “Although a witness statement should be…

← Previous 1 … 8 9 10 11 Next →

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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
  • “OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS
  • THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS: WEBINAR 17th APRIL 2026
  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER WHILST AN APPLICATION TO REALLOCATE THE CASE FROM BAND 2 TO BAND 1 IS PENDING: CAN THE COURT STILL PROCEED TO REALLOCATE?

Top Posts

  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • "OVERHEATED LANGUAGE" A "CAVALIER APPROACH" AND "THIN ALLEGATIONS": WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY...)
  • THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS: WEBINAR 17th APRIL 2026
  • ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER WHILST AN APPLICATION TO REALLOCATE THE CASE FROM BAND 2 TO BAND 1 IS PENDING: CAN THE COURT STILL PROCEED TO REALLOCATE?

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.